Search Results

Search found 67 results on 3 pages for 'trygetvalue'.

Page 1/3 | 1 2 3  | Next Page >

  • How can I implement the same behavior as Dictionary.TryGetValue

    - by pblasucci
    So, given then following code type MyClass () = let items = Dictionary<string,int>() do items.Add ("one",1) items.Add ("two",2) items.Add ("three",3) member this.TryGetValue (key,value) = items.TrygetValue (key,value) let c = MyClass () let d = Dictionary<string,int> () d.Add ("one",1) d.Add ("two",2) d.Add ("three",3) And the following test code let r1,v1 = d.TryGetValue "one" let r2,v2 = c.TryGetValue "one" The r1,v1 line works fine. The r2,v2 line bombs; complaining c.TryGetValue must be given a tuple. Interestingly, in each line the signature of TryGetValue is different. How can I get my custom implementation to exhibit the same behavior as the BCL version? Or, asked another way, since F# has (implicitly) the concept of tuple parameters, curried parameters, and BCL parameters, and I know how to distinguish between curried and tuple-style, how can I force the third style (a la BCL methods)? Let me know if this is unclear.

    Read the article

  • How can I make this Dictionary TryGetValue code more readable?

    - by mafutrct
    I'd like to test if an id was not yet known or, if it is known, if the associated value has changed. I'm currently using code similar to this, but it is hard to understand for those not familiar with the pattern. Can you think of a way to make it more readable while keeping it short in LOC? string id; string actual; string stored; if (!someDictionary.TryGetValue (id, out stored) || stored != actual) { // id not known yet or associated value changed. }

    Read the article

  • How to show that the double-checked-lock pattern with Dictionary's TryGetValue is not threadsafe in

    - by Amir
    Recently I've seen some C# projects that use a double-checked-lock pattern on a Dictionary. Something like this: private static readonly object _lock = new object(); private static volatile IDictionary<string, object> _cache = new Dictionary<string, object>(); public static object Create(string key) { object val; if (!_cache.TryGetValue(key, out val)) { lock (_lock) { if (!_cache.TryGetValue(key, out val)) { val = new object(); // factory construction based on key here. _cache.Add(key, val); } } } return val; } This code is incorrect, since the Dictionary can be "growing" the collection in _cache.Add() while _cache.TryGetValue (outside the lock) is iterating over the collection. It might be extremely unlikely in many situations, but is still wrong. Is there a simple program to demonstrate that this code fails? Does it make sense to incorporate this into a unit test? And if so, how?

    Read the article

  • C#/.NET Little Wonders: Using &lsquo;default&rsquo; to Get Default Values

    - by James Michael Hare
    Once again, in this series of posts I look at the parts of the .NET Framework that may seem trivial, but can help improve your code by making it easier to write and maintain. The index of all my past little wonders posts can be found here. Today’s little wonder is another of those small items that can help a lot in certain situations, especially when writing generics.  In particular, it is useful in determining what the default value of a given type would be. The Problem: what’s the default value for a generic type? There comes a time when you’re writing generic code where you may want to set an item of a given generic type.  Seems simple enough, right?  We’ll let’s see! Let’s say we want to query a Dictionary<TKey, TValue> for a given key and get back the value, but if the key doesn’t exist, we’d like a default value instead of throwing an exception. So, for example, we might have a the following dictionary defined: 1: var lookup = new Dictionary<int, string> 2: { 3: { 1, "Apple" }, 4: { 2, "Orange" }, 5: { 3, "Banana" }, 6: { 4, "Pear" }, 7: { 9, "Peach" } 8: }; And using those definitions, perhaps we want to do something like this: 1: // assume a default 2: string value = "Unknown"; 3:  4: // if the item exists in dictionary, get its value 5: if (lookup.ContainsKey(5)) 6: { 7: value = lookup[5]; 8: } But that’s inefficient, because then we’re double-hashing (once for ContainsKey() and once for the indexer).  Well, to avoid the double-hashing, we could use TryGetValue() instead: 1: string value; 2:  3: // if key exists, value will be put in value, if not default it 4: if (!lookup.TryGetValue(5, out value)) 5: { 6: value = "Unknown"; 7: } But the “flow” of using of TryGetValue() can get clunky at times when you just want to assign either the value or a default to a variable.  Essentially it’s 3-ish lines (depending on formatting) for 1 assignment.  So perhaps instead we’d like to write an extension method to support a cleaner interface that will return a default if the item isn’t found: 1: public static class DictionaryExtensions 2: { 3: public static TValue GetValueOrDefault<TKey, TValue>(this Dictionary<TKey, TValue> dict, 4: TKey key, TValue defaultIfNotFound) 5: { 6: TValue value; 7:  8: // value will be the result or the default for TValue 9: if (!dict.TryGetValue(key, out value)) 10: { 11: value = defaultIfNotFound; 12: } 13:  14: return value; 15: } 16: } 17:  So this creates an extension method on Dictionary<TKey, TValue> that will attempt to get a value using the given key, and will return the defaultIfNotFound as a stand-in if the key does not exist. This code compiles, fine, but what if we would like to go one step further and allow them to specify a default if not found, or accept the default for the type?  Obviously, we could overload the method to take the default or not, but that would be duplicated code and a bit heavy for just specifying a default.  It seems reasonable that we could set the not found value to be either the default for the type, or the specified value. So what if we defaulted the type to null? 1: public static TValue GetValueOrDefault<TKey, TValue>(this Dictionary<TKey, TValue> dict, 2: TKey key, TValue defaultIfNotFound = null) // ... No, this won’t work, because only reference types (and Nullable<T> wrapped types due to syntactical sugar) can be assigned to null.  So what about a calling parameterless constructor? 1: public static TValue GetValueOrDefault<TKey, TValue>(this Dictionary<TKey, TValue> dict, 2: TKey key, TValue defaultIfNotFound = new TValue()) // ... No, this won’t work either for several reasons.  First, we’d expect a reference type to return null, not an “empty” instance.  Secondly, not all reference types have a parameter-less constructor (string for example does not).  And finally, a constructor cannot be determined at compile-time, while default values can. The Solution: default(T) – returns the default value for type T Many of us know the default keyword for its uses in switch statements as the default case.  But it has another use as well: it can return us the default value for a given type.  And since it generates the same defaults that default field initialization uses, it can be determined at compile-time as well. For example: 1: var x = default(int); // x is 0 2:  3: var y = default(bool); // y is false 4:  5: var z = default(string); // z is null 6:  7: var t = default(TimeSpan); // t is a TimeSpan with Ticks == 0 8:  9: var n = default(int?); // n is a Nullable<int> with HasValue == false Notice that for numeric types the default is 0, and for reference types the default is null.  In addition, for struct types, the value is a default-constructed struct – which simply means a struct where every field has their default value (hence 0 Ticks for TimeSpan, etc.). So using this, we could modify our code to this: 1: public static class DictionaryExtensions 2: { 3: public static TValue GetValueOrDefault<TKey, TValue>(this Dictionary<TKey, TValue> dict, 4: TKey key, TValue defaultIfNotFound = default(TValue)) 5: { 6: TValue value; 7:  8: // value will be the result or the default for TValue 9: if (!dict.TryGetValue(key, out value)) 10: { 11: value = defaultIfNotFound; 12: } 13:  14: return value; 15: } 16: } Now, if defaultIfNotFound is unspecified, it will use default(TValue) which will be the default value for whatever value type the dictionary holds.  So let’s consider how we could use this: 1: lookup.GetValueOrDefault(1); // returns “Apple” 2:  3: lookup.GetValueOrDefault(5); // returns null 4:  5: lookup.GetValueOrDefault(5, “Unknown”); // returns “Unknown” 6:  Again, do not confuse a parameter-less constructor with the default value for a type.  Remember that the default value for any type is the compile-time default for any instance of that type (0 for numeric, false for bool, null for reference types, and struct will all default fields for struct).  Consider the difference: 1: // both zero 2: int i1 = default(int); 3: int i2 = new int(); 4:  5: // both “zeroed” structs 6: var dt1 = default(DateTime); 7: var dt2 = new DateTime(); 8:  9: // sb1 is null, sb2 is an “empty” string builder 10: var sb1 = default(StringBuilder()); 11: var sb2 = new StringBuilder(); So in the above code, notice that the value types all resolve the same whether using default or parameter-less construction.  This is because a value type is never null (even Nullable<T> wrapped types are never “null” in a reference sense), they will just by default contain fields with all default values. However, for reference types, the default is null and not a constructed instance.  Also it should be noted that not all classes have parameter-less constructors (string, for instance, doesn’t have one – and doesn’t need one). Summary Whenever you need to get the default value for a type, especially a generic type, consider using the default keyword.  This handy word will give you the default value for the given type at compile-time, which can then be used for initialization, optional parameters, etc. Technorati Tags: C#,CSharp,.NET,Little Wonders,default

    Read the article

  • Parallel.For Batching

    - by chibacity
    Is there built-in support in the TPL for batching operations? I was recently playing with a routine to carry out character replacement on a character array which required a lookup table i.e. transliteration: for (int i = 0; i < chars.Length; i++) { char replaceChar; if (lookup.TryGetValue(chars[i], out replaceChar)) { chars[i] = replaceChar; } } I could see that this could be trivially parallelized, so jumped in with a first stab which I knew would perform worse as the tasks were too fine-grained: Parallel.For(0, chars.Length, i => { char replaceChar; if (lookup.TryGetValue(chars[i], out replaceChar)) { chars[i] = replaceChar; } }); I then reworked the algorithm to use batching so that the work could be chunked onto different threads in less fine-grained batches. This made use of threads as expected and I got some near linear speed up. I'm sure that there must be built-in support for batching in the TPL. What is the syntax, and how do I use it? const int CharBatch = 100; int charLen = chars.Length; Parallel.For(0, ((charLen / CharBatch) + 1), i => { int batchUpper = ((i + 1) * CharBatch); for (int j = i * CharBatch; j < batchUpper && j < charLen; j++) { char replaceChar; if (lookup.TryGetValue(chars[j], out replaceChar)) { chars[j] = replaceChar; } } });

    Read the article

  • Bulk inserting and updating with Entity Framework (Probably a better alternative?)

    - by Dave
    I have a data set of devices, addresses, and companies that I need to import into our database, with the catch that our database may already include a specific device/address/company that is included in the new data set. If that is the case, I need to update that entry with the new information in the data set, excluding addresses. We check if an exact copy of that address exists, otherwise we make a new entry. My issue is that it is very slow to attempt to grab a device/company in EF and if it exist updated it, otherwise insert it. To fix this I tried to get all the companies, devices, and addresses and insert them into respective hashmaps, and check if the identifier of the new data exists in the hashmap. This hasn't led to any performance increases. I've included my code below. Typically I would do a batch insert, I'm not sure what I would do for a batch update though. Can someone advise a different route? var context = ObjectContextHelper.CurrentObjectContext; var oldDevices = context.Devices; var companies = context.Companies; var addresses = context.Addresses; Dictionary<string, Company> companyMap = new Dictionary<string, Company>(StringComparer.OrdinalIgnoreCase); Dictionary<string, Device> deviceMap = new Dictionary<string, Device>(StringComparer.OrdinalIgnoreCase); Dictionary<string, Address> addressMap = new Dictionary<string, Address>(StringComparer.OrdinalIgnoreCase); foreach (Company c in companies) { if (c.CompanyAccountID != null && !companyMap.ContainsKey(c.CompanyAccountID)) companyMap.Add(c.CompanyAccountID, c); } foreach (Device d in oldDevices) { if (d.SerialNumber != null && !deviceMap.ContainsKey(d.SerialNumber)) deviceMap.Add(d.SerialNumber, d); } foreach (Address a in addresses) { string identifier = GetAddressIdentifier(a); if (!addressMap.ContainsKey(identifier)) addressMap.Add(identifier, a); } foreach (DeviceData.TabsDevice device in devices) { // update a device Company tempCompany; Address tempAddress; Device currentDevice; if (deviceMap.ContainsKey(device.SerialNumber)) //update a device deviceMap.TryGetValue(device.SerialNumber, out currentDevice); else // insert a new device currentDevice = new Device(); currentDevice.SerialNumber = device.SerialNumber; currentDevice.SerialNumberTABS = device.SerialNumberTabs; currentDevice.Model = device.Model; if (device.CustomerAccountID != null && device.CustomerAccountID != "") { companyMap.TryGetValue(device.CustomerAccountID, out tempCompany); currentDevice.CustomerID = tempCompany.CompanyID; currentDevice.CustomerName = tempCompany.CompanyName; } if (companyMap.TryGetValue(device.ServicingDealerAccountID, out tempCompany)) currentDevice.CompanyID = tempCompany.CompanyID; currentDevice.StatusID = 1; currentDevice.Retries = 0; currentDevice.ControllerFamilyID = 1; if (currentDevice.EWBFrontPanelMsgOption == null) // set the Panel option to the default if it isn't set already currentDevice.EWBFrontPanelMsgOption = context.EWBFrontPanelMsgOptions.Where( i => i.OptionDescription.Contains("default")).Single(); // link the device to the existing address as long as it is actually an address if (addressMap.TryGetValue(GetAddressIdentifier(device.address), out tempAddress)) { if (GetAddressIdentifier(device.address) != "") currentDevice.Address = tempAddress; else currentDevice.Address = null; } else // insert a new Address and link the device to it (if not null) { if (GetAddressIdentifier(device.address) == "") currentDevice.Address = null; else { tempAddress = new Address(); tempAddress.Address1 = device.address.Address1; tempAddress.Address2 = device.address.Address2; tempAddress.Address3 = device.address.Address3; tempAddress.Address4 = device.address.Address4; tempAddress.City = device.address.City; tempAddress.Country = device.address.Country; tempAddress.PostalCode = device.address.PostalCode; tempAddress.State = device.address.State; addresses.AddObject(tempAddress); addressMap.Add(GetAddressIdentifier(tempAddress), tempAddress); currentDevice.Address = tempAddress; } } if (!deviceMap.ContainsKey(device.SerialNumber)) // if inserting, add to context { oldDevices.AddObject(currentDevice); deviceMap.Add(device.SerialNumber, currentDevice); } } context.SaveChanges();

    Read the article

  • Inside the Concurrent Collections: ConcurrentDictionary

    - by Simon Cooper
    Using locks to implement a thread-safe collection is rather like using a sledgehammer - unsubtle, easy to understand, and tends to make any other tool redundant. Unlike the previous two collections I looked at, ConcurrentStack and ConcurrentQueue, ConcurrentDictionary uses locks quite heavily. However, it is careful to wield locks only where necessary to ensure that concurrency is maximised. This will, by necessity, be a higher-level look than my other posts in this series, as there is quite a lot of code and logic in ConcurrentDictionary. Therefore, I do recommend that you have ConcurrentDictionary open in a decompiler to have a look at all the details that I skip over. The problem with locks There's several things to bear in mind when using locks, as encapsulated by the lock keyword in C# and the System.Threading.Monitor class in .NET (if you're unsure as to what lock does in C#, I briefly covered it in my first post in the series): Locks block threads The most obvious problem is that threads waiting on a lock can't do any work at all. No preparatory work, no 'optimistic' work like in ConcurrentQueue and ConcurrentStack, nothing. It sits there, waiting to be unblocked. This is bad if you're trying to maximise concurrency. Locks are slow Whereas most of the methods on the Interlocked class can be compiled down to a single CPU instruction, ensuring atomicity at the hardware level, taking out a lock requires some heavy lifting by the CLR and the operating system. There's quite a bit of work required to take out a lock, block other threads, and wake them up again. If locks are used heavily, this impacts performance. Deadlocks When using locks there's always the possibility of a deadlock - two threads, each holding a lock, each trying to aquire the other's lock. Fortunately, this can be avoided with careful programming and structured lock-taking, as we'll see. So, it's important to minimise where locks are used to maximise the concurrency and performance of the collection. Implementation As you might expect, ConcurrentDictionary is similar in basic implementation to the non-concurrent Dictionary, which I studied in a previous post. I'll be using some concepts introduced there, so I recommend you have a quick read of it. So, if you were implementing a thread-safe dictionary, what would you do? The naive implementation is to simply have a single lock around all methods accessing the dictionary. This would work, but doesn't allow much concurrency. Fortunately, the bucketing used by Dictionary allows a simple but effective improvement to this - one lock per bucket. This allows different threads modifying different buckets to do so in parallel. Any thread making changes to the contents of a bucket takes the lock for that bucket, ensuring those changes are thread-safe. The method that maps each bucket to a lock is the GetBucketAndLockNo method: private void GetBucketAndLockNo( int hashcode, out int bucketNo, out int lockNo, int bucketCount) { // the bucket number is the hashcode (without the initial sign bit) // modulo the number of buckets bucketNo = (hashcode & 0x7fffffff) % bucketCount; // and the lock number is the bucket number modulo the number of locks lockNo = bucketNo % m_locks.Length; } However, this does require some changes to how the buckets are implemented. The 'implicit' linked list within a single backing array used by the non-concurrent Dictionary adds a dependency between separate buckets, as every bucket uses the same backing array. Instead, ConcurrentDictionary uses a strict linked list on each bucket: This ensures that each bucket is entirely separate from all other buckets; adding or removing an item from a bucket is independent to any changes to other buckets. Modifying the dictionary All the operations on the dictionary follow the same basic pattern: void AlterBucket(TKey key, ...) { int bucketNo, lockNo; 1: GetBucketAndLockNo( key.GetHashCode(), out bucketNo, out lockNo, m_buckets.Length); 2: lock (m_locks[lockNo]) { 3: Node headNode = m_buckets[bucketNo]; 4: Mutate the node linked list as appropriate } } For example, when adding another entry to the dictionary, you would iterate through the linked list to check whether the key exists already, and add the new entry as the head node. When removing items, you would find the entry to remove (if it exists), and remove the node from the linked list. Adding, updating, and removing items all follow this pattern. Performance issues There is a problem we have to address at this point. If the number of buckets in the dictionary is fixed in the constructor, then the performance will degrade from O(1) to O(n) when a large number of items are added to the dictionary. As more and more items get added to the linked lists in each bucket, the lookup operations will spend most of their time traversing a linear linked list. To fix this, the buckets array has to be resized once the number of items in each bucket has gone over a certain limit. (In ConcurrentDictionary this limit is when the size of the largest bucket is greater than the number of buckets for each lock. This check is done at the end of the TryAddInternal method.) Resizing the bucket array and re-hashing everything affects every bucket in the collection. Therefore, this operation needs to take out every lock in the collection. Taking out mutiple locks at once inevitably summons the spectre of the deadlock; two threads each hold a lock, and each trying to acquire the other lock. How can we eliminate this? Simple - ensure that threads never try to 'swap' locks in this fashion. When taking out multiple locks, always take them out in the same order, and always take out all the locks you need before starting to release them. In ConcurrentDictionary, this is controlled by the AcquireLocks, AcquireAllLocks and ReleaseLocks methods. Locks are always taken out and released in the order they are in the m_locks array, and locks are all released right at the end of the method in a finally block. At this point, it's worth pointing out that the locks array is never re-assigned, even when the buckets array is increased in size. The number of locks is fixed in the constructor by the concurrencyLevel parameter. This simplifies programming the locks; you don't have to check if the locks array has changed or been re-assigned before taking out a lock object. And you can be sure that when a thread takes out a lock, another thread isn't going to re-assign the lock array. This would create a new series of lock objects, thus allowing another thread to ignore the existing locks (and any threads controlling them), breaking thread-safety. Consequences of growing the array Just because we're using locks doesn't mean that race conditions aren't a problem. We can see this by looking at the GrowTable method. The operation of this method can be boiled down to: private void GrowTable(Node[] buckets) { try { 1: Acquire first lock in the locks array // this causes any other thread trying to take out // all the locks to block because the first lock in the array // is always the one taken out first // check if another thread has already resized the buckets array // while we were waiting to acquire the first lock 2: if (buckets != m_buckets) return; 3: Calculate the new size of the backing array 4: Node[] array = new array[size]; 5: Acquire all the remaining locks 6: Re-hash the contents of the existing buckets into array 7: m_buckets = array; } finally { 8: Release all locks } } As you can see, there's already a check for a race condition at step 2, for the case when the GrowTable method is called twice in quick succession on two separate threads. One will successfully resize the buckets array (blocking the second in the meantime), when the second thread is unblocked it'll see that the array has already been resized & exit without doing anything. There is another case we need to consider; looking back at the AlterBucket method above, consider the following situation: Thread 1 calls AlterBucket; step 1 is executed to get the bucket and lock numbers. Thread 2 calls GrowTable and executes steps 1-5; thread 1 is blocked when it tries to take out the lock in step 2. Thread 2 re-hashes everything, re-assigns the buckets array, and releases all the locks (steps 6-8). Thread 1 is unblocked and continues executing, but the calculated bucket and lock numbers are no longer valid. Between calculating the correct bucket and lock number and taking out the lock, another thread has changed where everything is. Not exactly thread-safe. Well, a similar problem was solved in ConcurrentStack and ConcurrentQueue by storing a local copy of the state, doing the necessary calculations, then checking if that state is still valid. We can use a similar idea here: void AlterBucket(TKey key, ...) { while (true) { Node[] buckets = m_buckets; int bucketNo, lockNo; GetBucketAndLockNo( key.GetHashCode(), out bucketNo, out lockNo, buckets.Length); lock (m_locks[lockNo]) { // if the state has changed, go back to the start if (buckets != m_buckets) continue; Node headNode = m_buckets[bucketNo]; Mutate the node linked list as appropriate } break; } } TryGetValue and GetEnumerator And so, finally, we get onto TryGetValue and GetEnumerator. I've left these to the end because, well, they don't actually use any locks. How can this be? Whenever you change a bucket, you need to take out the corresponding lock, yes? Indeed you do. However, it is important to note that TryGetValue and GetEnumerator don't actually change anything. Just as immutable objects are, by definition, thread-safe, read-only operations don't need to take out a lock because they don't change anything. All lockless methods can happily iterate through the buckets and linked lists without worrying about locking anything. However, this does put restrictions on how the other methods operate. Because there could be another thread in the middle of reading the dictionary at any time (even if a lock is taken out), the dictionary has to be in a valid state at all times. Every change to state has to be made visible to other threads in a single atomic operation (all relevant variables are marked volatile to help with this). This restriction ensures that whatever the reading threads are doing, they never read the dictionary in an invalid state (eg items that should be in the collection temporarily removed from the linked list, or reading a node that has had it's key & value removed before the node itself has been removed from the linked list). Fortunately, all the operations needed to change the dictionary can be done in that way. Bucket resizes are made visible when the new array is assigned back to the m_buckets variable. Any additions or modifications to a node are done by creating a new node, then splicing it into the existing list using a single variable assignment. Node removals are simply done by re-assigning the node's m_next pointer. Because the dictionary can be changed by another thread during execution of the lockless methods, the GetEnumerator method is liable to return dirty reads - changes made to the dictionary after GetEnumerator was called, but before the enumeration got to that point in the dictionary. It's worth listing at this point which methods are lockless, and which take out all the locks in the dictionary to ensure they get a consistent view of the dictionary: Lockless: TryGetValue GetEnumerator The indexer getter ContainsKey Takes out every lock (lockfull?): Count IsEmpty Keys Values CopyTo ToArray Concurrent principles That covers the overall implementation of ConcurrentDictionary. I haven't even begun to scratch the surface of this sophisticated collection. That I leave to you. However, we've looked at enough to be able to extract some useful principles for concurrent programming: Partitioning When using locks, the work is partitioned into independant chunks, each with its own lock. Each partition can then be modified concurrently to other partitions. Ordered lock-taking When a method does need to control the entire collection, locks are taken and released in a fixed order to prevent deadlocks. Lockless reads Read operations that don't care about dirty reads don't take out any lock; the rest of the collection is implemented so that any reading thread always has a consistent view of the collection. That leads us to the final collection in this little series - ConcurrentBag. Lacking a non-concurrent analogy, it is quite different to any other collection in the class libraries. Prepare your thinking hats!

    Read the article

  • Recreating a Dictionary from an IEnumerable

    - by learnerplates
    But some of the callers is the Dictionary's TryGetValue and ContainsKey and so require the result of the method to be a Dictionary, how can I convert the IEnumerable into a Dictionary so that I can use TryGetValue ? I've a method which at present returns an IEnumerable. I want to make it more generic by making it return an IEnumerable. method: public IEnumerable<KeyValuePair<string, ArrayList>> GetComponents() { // ... yield return new KeyValuePair<string, ArrayList>(t.Name, controlInformation); } caller: Dictionary<string, ArrayList> actual = target.GetComponents(); actual.ContainsKey("something");

    Read the article

  • C# 4: The Curious ConcurrentDictionary

    - by James Michael Hare
    In my previous post (here) I did a comparison of the new ConcurrentQueue versus the old standard of a System.Collections.Generic Queue with simple locking.  The results were exactly what I would have hoped, that the ConcurrentQueue was faster with multi-threading for most all situations.  In addition, concurrent collections have the added benefit that you can enumerate them even if they're being modified. So I set out to see what the improvements would be for the ConcurrentDictionary, would it have the same performance benefits as the ConcurrentQueue did?  Well, after running some tests and multiple tweaks and tunes, I have good and bad news. But first, let's look at the tests.  Obviously there's many things we can do with a dictionary.  One of the most notable uses, of course, in a multi-threaded environment is for a small, local in-memory cache.  So I set about to do a very simple simulation of a cache where I would create a test class that I'll just call an Accessor.  This accessor will attempt to look up a key in the dictionary, and if the key exists, it stops (i.e. a cache "hit").  However, if the lookup fails, it will then try to add the key and value to the dictionary (i.e. a cache "miss").  So here's the Accessor that will run the tests: 1: internal class Accessor 2: { 3: public int Hits { get; set; } 4: public int Misses { get; set; } 5: public Func<int, string> GetDelegate { get; set; } 6: public Action<int, string> AddDelegate { get; set; } 7: public int Iterations { get; set; } 8: public int MaxRange { get; set; } 9: public int Seed { get; set; } 10:  11: public void Access() 12: { 13: var randomGenerator = new Random(Seed); 14:  15: for (int i=0; i<Iterations; i++) 16: { 17: // give a wide spread so will have some duplicates and some unique 18: var target = randomGenerator.Next(1, MaxRange); 19:  20: // attempt to grab the item from the cache 21: var result = GetDelegate(target); 22:  23: // if the item doesn't exist, add it 24: if(result == null) 25: { 26: AddDelegate(target, target.ToString()); 27: Misses++; 28: } 29: else 30: { 31: Hits++; 32: } 33: } 34: } 35: } Note that so I could test different implementations, I defined a GetDelegate and AddDelegate that will call the appropriate dictionary methods to add or retrieve items in the cache using various techniques. So let's examine the three techniques I decided to test: Dictionary with mutex - Just your standard generic Dictionary with a simple lock construct on an internal object. Dictionary with ReaderWriterLockSlim - Same Dictionary, but now using a lock designed to let multiple readers access simultaneously and then locked when a writer needs access. ConcurrentDictionary - The new ConcurrentDictionary from System.Collections.Concurrent that is supposed to be optimized to allow multiple threads to access safely. So the approach to each of these is also fairly straight-forward.  Let's look at the GetDelegate and AddDelegate implementations for the Dictionary with mutex lock: 1: var addDelegate = (key,val) => 2: { 3: lock (_mutex) 4: { 5: _dictionary[key] = val; 6: } 7: }; 8: var getDelegate = (key) => 9: { 10: lock (_mutex) 11: { 12: string val; 13: return _dictionary.TryGetValue(key, out val) ? val : null; 14: } 15: }; Nothing new or fancy here, just your basic lock on a private object and then query/insert into the Dictionary. Now, for the Dictionary with ReadWriteLockSlim it's a little more complex: 1: var addDelegate = (key,val) => 2: { 3: _readerWriterLock.EnterWriteLock(); 4: _dictionary[key] = val; 5: _readerWriterLock.ExitWriteLock(); 6: }; 7: var getDelegate = (key) => 8: { 9: string val; 10: _readerWriterLock.EnterReadLock(); 11: if(!_dictionary.TryGetValue(key, out val)) 12: { 13: val = null; 14: } 15: _readerWriterLock.ExitReadLock(); 16: return val; 17: }; And finally, the ConcurrentDictionary, which since it does all it's own concurrency control, is remarkably elegant and simple: 1: var addDelegate = (key,val) => 2: { 3: _concurrentDictionary[key] = val; 4: }; 5: var getDelegate = (key) => 6: { 7: string s; 8: return _concurrentDictionary.TryGetValue(key, out s) ? s : null; 9: };                    Then, I set up a test harness that would simply ask the user for the number of concurrent Accessors to attempt to Access the cache (as specified in Accessor.Access() above) and then let them fly and see how long it took them all to complete.  Each of these tests was run with 10,000,000 cache accesses divided among the available Accessor instances.  All times are in milliseconds. 1: Dictionary with Mutex Locking 2: --------------------------------------------------- 3: Accessors Mostly Misses Mostly Hits 4: 1 7916 3285 5: 10 8293 3481 6: 100 8799 3532 7: 1000 8815 3584 8:  9:  10: Dictionary with ReaderWriterLockSlim Locking 11: --------------------------------------------------- 12: Accessors Mostly Misses Mostly Hits 13: 1 8445 3624 14: 10 11002 4119 15: 100 11076 3992 16: 1000 14794 4861 17:  18:  19: Concurrent Dictionary 20: --------------------------------------------------- 21: Accessors Mostly Misses Mostly Hits 22: 1 17443 3726 23: 10 14181 1897 24: 100 15141 1994 25: 1000 17209 2128 The first test I did across the board is the Mostly Misses category.  The mostly misses (more adds because data requested was not in the dictionary) shows an interesting trend.  In both cases the Dictionary with the simple mutex lock is much faster, and the ConcurrentDictionary is the slowest solution.  But this got me thinking, and a little research seemed to confirm it, maybe the ConcurrentDictionary is more optimized to concurrent "gets" than "adds".  So since the ratio of misses to hits were 2 to 1, I decided to reverse that and see the results. So I tweaked the data so that the number of keys were much smaller than the number of iterations to give me about a 2 to 1 ration of hits to misses (twice as likely to already find the item in the cache than to need to add it).  And yes, indeed here we see that the ConcurrentDictionary is indeed faster than the standard Dictionary here.  I have a strong feeling that as the ration of hits-to-misses gets higher and higher these number gets even better as well.  This makes sense since the ConcurrentDictionary is read-optimized. Also note that I tried the tests with capacity and concurrency hints on the ConcurrentDictionary but saw very little improvement, I think this is largely because on the 10,000,000 hit test it quickly ramped up to the correct capacity and concurrency and thus the impact was limited to the first few milliseconds of the run. So what does this tell us?  Well, as in all things, ConcurrentDictionary is not a panacea.  It won't solve all your woes and it shouldn't be the only Dictionary you ever use.  So when should we use each? Use System.Collections.Generic.Dictionary when: You need a single-threaded Dictionary (no locking needed). You need a multi-threaded Dictionary that is loaded only once at creation and never modified (no locking needed). You need a multi-threaded Dictionary to store items where writes are far more prevalent than reads (locking needed). And use System.Collections.Concurrent.ConcurrentDictionary when: You need a multi-threaded Dictionary where the writes are far more prevalent than reads. You need to be able to iterate over the collection without locking it even if its being modified. Both Dictionaries have their strong suits, I have a feeling this is just one where you need to know from design what you hope to use it for and make your decision based on that criteria.

    Read the article

  • Is something along the lines of nested memoization needed here?

    - by Daniel
    System.Transactions notoriously escalates transactions involving multiple connections to the same database to the DTC. The module and helper class, ConnectionContext, below are meant to prevent this by ensuring multiple connection requests for the same database return the same connection object. This is, in some sense, memoization, although there are multiple things being memoized and the second is dependent on the first. Is there some way to hide the synchronization and/or mutable state (perhaps using memoization) in this module, or perhaps rewrite it in a more functional style? (It may be worth nothing that there's no locking when getting the connection by connection string because Transaction.Current is ThreadStatic.) type ConnectionContext(connection:IDbConnection, ownsConnection) = member x.Connection = connection member x.OwnsConnection = ownsConnection interface IDisposable with member x.Dispose() = if ownsConnection then connection.Dispose() module ConnectionManager = let private _connections = new Dictionary<string, Dictionary<string, IDbConnection>>() let private getTid (t:Transaction) = t.TransactionInformation.LocalIdentifier let private removeConnection tid = let cl = _connections.[tid] for (KeyValue(_, con)) in cl do con.Close() lock _connections (fun () -> _connections.Remove(tid) |> ignore) let getConnection connectionString (openConnection:(unit -> IDbConnection)) = match Transaction.Current with | null -> new ConnectionContext(openConnection(), true) | current -> let tid = getTid current // get connections for the current transaction let connections = match _connections.TryGetValue(tid) with | true, cl -> cl | false, _ -> let cl = Dictionary<_,_>() lock _connections (fun () -> _connections.Add(tid, cl)) cl // find connection for this connection string let connection = match connections.TryGetValue(connectionString) with | true, con -> con | false, _ -> let initial = (connections.Count = 0) let con = openConnection() connections.Add(connectionString, con) // if this is the first connection for this transaction, register connections for cleanup if initial then current.TransactionCompleted.Add (fun args -> let id = getTid args.Transaction removeConnection id) con new ConnectionContext(connection, false)

    Read the article

  • Loading any MVC page fails with the error "An item with the same key has already been added."

    - by MajorRefactoring
    I am having an intermittent issue that is appearing on one server only, and is causing all MVC pages to fail to load with the error "An item with the same key has already been added." Restarting the application pool fixes the issue, but until then, loading any mvc page throws the following exception: Event code: 3005 Event message: An unhandled exception has occurred. Event time: 10/11/2012 08:09:24 Event time (UTC): 10/11/2012 08:09:24 Event ID: d76264aedc4241d4bce9247692510466 Event sequence: 6407 Event occurrence: 30 Event detail code: 0 Application information: Application domain: /LM/W3SVC/21/ROOT-2-129969647741292058 Trust level: Full Application Virtual Path: / Application Path: d:\websites\SiteAndAppPoolName\ Machine name: UKSERVER Process information: Process ID: 6156 Process name: w3wp.exe Account name: IIS APPPOOL\SiteAndAppPoolName Exception information: Exception type: ArgumentException Exception message: An item with the same key has already been added. Server stack trace: at System.Collections.Generic.Dictionary`2.Insert(TKey key, TValue value, Boolean add) at System.Linq.Enumerable.ToDictionary[TSource,TKey,TElement](IEnumerable`1 source, Func`2 keySelector, Func`2 elementSelector, IEqualityComparer`1 comparer) at System.Web.WebPages.Scope.WebConfigScopeDictionary.<>c__DisplayClass4.<.ctor>b__0() at System.Lazy`1.CreateValue() Exception rethrown at [0]: at System.Lazy`1.get_Value() at System.Web.WebPages.Scope.WebConfigScopeDictionary.TryGetValue(Object key, Object& value) at System.Web.Mvc.ViewContext.ScopeGet[TValue](IDictionary`2 scope, String name, TValue defaultValue) at System.Web.Mvc.ViewContext.ScopeCache.Get(IDictionary`2 scope, HttpContextBase httpContext) at System.Web.Mvc.ViewContext.GetClientValidationEnabled(IDictionary`2 scope, HttpContextBase httpContext) at System.Web.Mvc.Html.FormExtensions.FormHelper(HtmlHelper htmlHelper, String formAction, FormMethod method, IDictionary`2 htmlAttributes) at System.Web.Mvc.Html.FormExtensions.BeginForm(HtmlHelper htmlHelper, String actionName, String controllerName) at ASP._Page_Views_Dashboard_Functions_BookingQuickLookup_cshtml.Execute() in d:\Websites\SiteAndAppPoolName\Views\Dashboard\Functions\BookingQuickLookup.cshtml:line 3 at System.Web.WebPages.WebPageBase.ExecutePageHierarchy() at System.Web.Mvc.WebViewPage.ExecutePageHierarchy() at System.Web.WebPages.WebPageBase.ExecutePageHierarchy(WebPageContext pageContext, TextWriter writer, WebPageRenderingBase startPage) at System.Web.Mvc.Html.PartialExtensions.Partial(HtmlHelper htmlHelper, String partialViewName, Object model, ViewDataDictionary viewData) at ASP._Page_Views_Dashboard_Functions_cshtml.Execute() in d:\Websites\SiteAndAppPoolName\Views\Dashboard\Functions.cshtml:line 5 at System.Web.WebPages.WebPageBase.ExecutePageHierarchy() at System.Web.Mvc.WebViewPage.ExecutePageHierarchy() at System.Web.WebPages.WebPageBase.ExecutePageHierarchy(WebPageContext pageContext, TextWriter writer, WebPageRenderingBase startPage) at System.Web.Mvc.Html.RenderPartialExtensions.RenderPartial(HtmlHelper htmlHelper, String partialViewName, Object model) at ASP._Page_Views_Dashboard_Index_cshtml.Execute() in d:\Websites\SiteAndAppPoolName\Views\Dashboard\Index.cshtml:line 9 at System.Web.WebPages.WebPageBase.ExecutePageHierarchy() at System.Web.Mvc.WebViewPage.ExecutePageHierarchy() at System.Web.WebPages.WebPageBase.ExecutePageHierarchy(WebPageContext pageContext, TextWriter writer, WebPageRenderingBase startPage) at System.Web.Mvc.ViewResultBase.ExecuteResult(ControllerContext context) at System.Web.Mvc.ControllerActionInvoker.<>c__DisplayClass1c.<InvokeActionResultWithFilters>b__19() at System.Web.Mvc.ControllerActionInvoker.InvokeActionResultFilter(IResultFilter filter, ResultExecutingContext preContext, Func`1 continuation) at System.Web.Mvc.ControllerActionInvoker.InvokeActionResultFilter(IResultFilter filter, ResultExecutingContext preContext, Func`1 continuation) at System.Web.Mvc.ControllerActionInvoker.InvokeActionResultWithFilters(ControllerContext controllerContext, IList`1 filters, ActionResult actionResult) at System.Web.Mvc.ControllerActionInvoker.InvokeAction(ControllerContext controllerContext, String actionName) at System.Web.Mvc.Controller.ExecuteCore() at System.Web.Mvc.ControllerBase.Execute(RequestContext requestContext) at System.Web.Mvc.MvcHandler.<>c__DisplayClass6.<>c__DisplayClassb.<BeginProcessRequest>b__5() at System.Web.Mvc.Async.AsyncResultWrapper.<>c__DisplayClass1.<MakeVoidDelegate>b__0() at System.Web.Mvc.MvcHandler.<>c__DisplayClasse.<EndProcessRequest>b__d() at System.Web.HttpApplication.CallHandlerExecutionStep.System.Web.HttpApplication.IExecutionStep.Execute() at System.Web.HttpApplication.ExecuteStep(IExecutionStep step, Boolean& completedSynchronously) Request information: Request URL: http://SiteAndAppPoolName.spawtz.com/Dashboard Request path: /Dashboard User host address: 86.164.135.41 User: Is authenticated: False Authentication Type: Thread account name: IIS APPPOOL\SiteAndAppPoolName Thread information: Thread ID: 17 Thread account name: IIS APPPOOL\SiteAndAppPoolName Is impersonating: False Stack trace: at System.Lazy`1.get_Value() at System.Web.WebPages.Scope.WebConfigScopeDictionary.TryGetValue(Object key, Object& value) at System.Web.Mvc.ViewContext.ScopeGet[TValue](IDictionary`2 scope, String name, TValue defaultValue) at System.Web.Mvc.ViewContext.ScopeCache.Get(IDictionary`2 scope, HttpContextBase httpContext) at System.Web.Mvc.ViewContext.GetClientValidationEnabled(IDictionary`2 scope, HttpContextBase httpContext) at System.Web.Mvc.Html.FormExtensions.FormHelper(HtmlHelper htmlHelper, String formAction, FormMethod method, IDictionary`2 htmlAttributes) at System.Web.Mvc.Html.FormExtensions.BeginForm(HtmlHelper htmlHelper, String actionName, String controllerName) at ASP._Page_Views_Dashboard_Functions_BookingQuickLookup_cshtml.Execute() in d:\Websites\SiteAndAppPoolName\Views\Dashboard\Functions\BookingQuickLookup.cshtml:line 3 at System.Web.WebPages.WebPageBase.ExecutePageHierarchy() at System.Web.Mvc.WebViewPage.ExecutePageHierarchy() at System.Web.WebPages.WebPageBase.ExecutePageHierarchy(WebPageContext pageContext, TextWriter writer, WebPageRenderingBase startPage) at System.Web.Mvc.Html.PartialExtensions.Partial(HtmlHelper htmlHelper, String partialViewName, Object model, ViewDataDictionary viewData) at ASP._Page_Views_Dashboard_Functions_cshtml.Execute() in d:\Websites\SiteAndAppPoolName\Views\Dashboard\Functions.cshtml:line 5 at System.Web.WebPages.WebPageBase.ExecutePageHierarchy() at System.Web.Mvc.WebViewPage.ExecutePageHierarchy() at System.Web.WebPages.WebPageBase.ExecutePageHierarchy(WebPageContext pageContext, TextWriter writer, WebPageRenderingBase startPage) at System.Web.Mvc.Html.RenderPartialExtensions.RenderPartial(HtmlHelper htmlHelper, String partialViewName, Object model) at ASP._Page_Views_Dashboard_Index_cshtml.Execute() in d:\Websites\SiteAndAppPoolName\Views\Dashboard\Index.cshtml:line 9 at System.Web.WebPages.WebPageBase.ExecutePageHierarchy() at System.Web.Mvc.WebViewPage.ExecutePageHierarchy() at System.Web.WebPages.WebPageBase.ExecutePageHierarchy(WebPageContext pageContext, TextWriter writer, WebPageRenderingBase startPage) at System.Web.Mvc.ViewResultBase.ExecuteResult(ControllerContext context) at System.Web.Mvc.ControllerActionInvoker.<>c__DisplayClass1c.<InvokeActionResultWithFilters>b__19() at System.Web.Mvc.ControllerActionInvoker.InvokeActionResultFilter(IResultFilter filter, ResultExecutingContext preContext, Func`1 continuation) at System.Web.Mvc.ControllerActionInvoker.InvokeActionResultFilter(IResultFilter filter, ResultExecutingContext preContext, Func`1 continuation) at System.Web.Mvc.ControllerActionInvoker.InvokeActionResultWithFilters(ControllerContext controllerContext, IList`1 filters, ActionResult actionResult) at System.Web.Mvc.ControllerActionInvoker.InvokeAction(ControllerContext controllerContext, String actionName) at System.Web.Mvc.Controller.ExecuteCore() at System.Web.Mvc.ControllerBase.Execute(RequestContext requestContext) at System.Web.Mvc.MvcHandler.<>c__DisplayClass6.<>c__DisplayClassb.<BeginProcessRequest>b__5() at System.Web.Mvc.Async.AsyncResultWrapper.<>c__DisplayClass1.<MakeVoidDelegate>b__0() at System.Web.Mvc.MvcHandler.<>c__DisplayClasse.<EndProcessRequest>b__d() at System.Web.HttpApplication.CallHandlerExecutionStep.System.Web.HttpApplication.IExecutionStep.Execute() at System.Web.HttpApplication.ExecuteStep(IExecutionStep step, Boolean& completedSynchronously) Custom event details: As mentioned, it's every MVC action that throws this error until the app pool is restarted, and the error seems to be occurring in System.Web.WebPages.Scope.WebConfigScopeDictionary.TryGetValue(Object key, Object& value) Has anyone seen this issue before? It's only happening on this server, on any of the app pools on the server (not confined to this one) and an app pool restart sorts it. Any help much appreciated. Cheers, Matthew

    Read the article

  • JSON.Net: deserializing polymorphic types without specifying the assembly

    - by Frank Schwieterman
    I see that using JSON.Net, I can decode polymorphic objects if a $type attribute specifies the specific type of the JSON object. In all the examples I've seen, $type includes the namespace. Is it possible to make this work including just a simple typename without the assembly? I'd be happy to specify a default assembly to the JsonSerializer if thats possible I am able to deserialize the JSON using: public class SingleAssemblyJsonTypeBinder : SerializationBinder { private readonly Assembly _assembly; private Dictionary _typesBySimpleName = new Dictionary(StringComparer.OrdinalIgnoreCase); private Dictionary _simpleNameByType = new Dictionary(); public SingleAssemblyJsonTypeBinder(Assembly assembly) { _assembly = assembly; _typesBySimpleName = new Dictionary<string, Type>(); foreach (var type in _assembly.GetTypes().Where(t => t.IsPublic)) { if (_typesBySimpleName.ContainsKey(type.Name)) throw new InvalidOperationException("Cannot user PolymorphicBinder on a namespace where multiple public types have same name."); _typesBySimpleName[type.Name] = type; _simpleNameByType[type] = type.Name; } } public override Type BindToType(string assemblyName, string typeName) { Type result; if (_typesBySimpleName.TryGetValue(typeName.Trim(), out result)) return result; return null; } public override void BindToName(Type serializedType, out string assemblyName, out string typeName) { string name; if (_simpleNameByType.TryGetValue(serializedType, out name)) { typeName = name; assemblyName = null;// _assembly.FullName; } else { typeName = null; assemblyName = null; } } } ... public static JsonSerializerSettings GetJsonSerializationSettings() { var settings = new JsonSerializerSettings(); settings.Binder = new SingleAssemblyJsonTypeBinder(typeof(MvcApplication).Assembly); settings.TypeNameHandling = TypeNameHandling.Objects; return settings; } .... var serializer = JsonSerializer.Create(settings); I haven't been able to make this work with MVC though, I'm configuring json deserialization per the code below in Application_Start, and the object is deserialized, but using the base type one. GlobalConfiguration.Configuration.Formatters.JsonFormatter.SerializerSettings.Binder = new SingleAssemblyJsonTypeBinder(this.GetType().Assembly); GlobalConfiguration.Configuration.Formatters.JsonFormatter.SerializerSettings.TypeNameHandling = TypeNameHandling.All; GlobalConfiguration.Configuration.Formatters.JsonFormatter.SerializerSettings.TypeNameAssemblyFormat = FormatterAssemblyStyle.Simple;

    Read the article

  • Passing a complex object to a page while navigating in a WP7 Silverlight application

    - by Andreas Grech
    I have been using the NavigationService's Navigate method to navigate to other pages in my WP7 Silverlight app: NavigationService.Navigate(new Uri("/Somepage.xaml?val=dreas", UriKind.Relative)); From Somepage.xaml, I then retrieve the query string parameters as follows: string val; NavigationContext.QueryString.TryGetValue("val", out val); I now need a way to pass a complex object using a similar manner. How can I do this without having to serialize the object every time I need to pass it to a new page?

    Read the article

  • Sending Messages to SignalR Hubs from the Outside

    - by Ricardo Peres
    Introduction You are by now probably familiarized with SignalR, Microsoft’s API for real-time web functionality. This is, in my opinion, one of the greatest products Microsoft has released in recent time. Usually, people login to a site and enter some page which is connected to a SignalR hub. Then they can send and receive messages – not just text messages, mind you – to other users in the same hub. Also, the server can also take the initiative to send messages to all or a specified subset of users on its own, this is known as server push. The normal flow is pretty straightforward, Microsoft has done a great job with the API, it’s clean and quite simple to use. And for the latter – the server taking the initiative – it’s also quite simple, just involves a little more work. The Problem The API for sending messages can be achieved from inside a hub – an instance of the Hub class – which is something that we don’t have if we are the server and we want to send a message to some user or group of users: the Hub instance is only instantiated in response to a client message. The Solution It is possible to acquire a hub’s context from outside of an actual Hub instance, by calling GlobalHost.ConnectionManager.GetHubContext<T>(). This API allows us to: Broadcast messages to all connected clients (possibly excluding some); Send messages to a specific client; Send messages to a group of clients. So, we have groups and clients, each is identified by a string. Client strings are called connection ids and group names are free-form, given by us. The problem with client strings is, we do not know how these map to actual users. One way to achieve this mapping is by overriding the Hub’s OnConnected and OnDisconnected methods and managing the association there. Here’s an example: 1: public class MyHub : Hub 2: { 3: private static readonly IDictionary<String, ISet<String>> users = new ConcurrentDictionary<String, ISet<String>>(); 4:  5: public static IEnumerable<String> GetUserConnections(String username) 6: { 7: ISet<String> connections; 8:  9: users.TryGetValue(username, out connections); 10:  11: return (connections ?? Enumerable.Empty<String>()); 12: } 13:  14: private static void AddUser(String username, String connectionId) 15: { 16: ISet<String> connections; 17:  18: if (users.TryGetValue(username, out connections) == false) 19: { 20: connections = users[username] = new HashSet<String>(); 21: } 22:  23: connections.Add(connectionId); 24: } 25:  26: private static void RemoveUser(String username, String connectionId) 27: { 28: users[username].Remove(connectionId); 29: } 30:  31: public override Task OnConnected() 32: { 33: AddUser(this.Context.Request.User.Identity.Name, this.Context.ConnectionId); 34: return (base.OnConnected()); 35: } 36:  37: public override Task OnDisconnected() 38: { 39: RemoveUser(this.Context.Request.User.Identity.Name, this.Context.ConnectionId); 40: return (base.OnDisconnected()); 41: } 42: } As you can see, I am using a static field to store the mapping between a user and its possibly many connections – for example, multiple open browser tabs or even multiple browsers accessing the same page with the same login credentials. The user identity, as is normal in .NET, is obtained from the IPrincipal which in SignalR hubs case is stored in Context.Request.User. Of course, this property will only have a meaningful value if we enforce authentication. Another way to go is by creating a group for each user that connects: 1: public class MyHub : Hub 2: { 3: public override Task OnConnected() 4: { 5: this.Groups.Add(this.Context.ConnectionId, this.Context.Request.User.Identity.Name); 6: return (base.OnConnected()); 7: } 8:  9: public override Task OnDisconnected() 10: { 11: this.Groups.Remove(this.Context.ConnectionId, this.Context.Request.User.Identity.Name); 12: return (base.OnDisconnected()); 13: } 14: } In this case, we will have a one-to-one equivalence between users and groups. All connections belonging to the same user will fall in the same group. So, if we want to send messages to a user from outside an instance of the Hub class, we can do something like this, for the first option – user mappings stored in a static field: 1: public void SendUserMessage(String username, String message) 2: { 3: var context = GlobalHost.ConnectionManager.GetHubContext<MyHub>(); 4: 5: foreach (String connectionId in HelloHub.GetUserConnections(username)) 6: { 7: context.Clients.Client(connectionId).sendUserMessage(message); 8: } 9: } And for using groups, its even simpler: 1: public void SendUserMessage(String username, String message) 2: { 3: var context = GlobalHost.ConnectionManager.GetHubContext<MyHub>(); 4:  5: context.Clients.Group(username).sendUserMessage(message); 6: } Using groups has the advantage that the IHubContext interface returned from GetHubContext has direct support for groups, no need to send messages to individual connections. Of course, you can wrap both mapping options in a common API, perhaps exposed through IoC. One example of its interface might be: 1: public interface IUserToConnectionMappingService 2: { 3: //associate and dissociate connections to users 4:  5: void AddUserConnection(String username, String connectionId); 6:  7: void RemoveUserConnection(String username, String connectionId); 8: } SignalR has built-in dependency resolution, by means of the static GlobalHost.DependencyResolver property: 1: //for using groups (in the Global class) 2: GlobalHost.DependencyResolver.Register(typeof(IUserToConnectionMappingService), () => new GroupsMappingService()); 3:  4: //for using a static field (in the Global class) 5: GlobalHost.DependencyResolver.Register(typeof(IUserToConnectionMappingService), () => new StaticMappingService()); 6:  7: //retrieving the current service (in the Hub class) 8: var mapping = GlobalHost.DependencyResolver.Resolve<IUserToConnectionMappingService>(); Now all you have to do is implement GroupsMappingService and StaticMappingService with the code I shown here and change SendUserMessage method to rely in the dependency resolver for the actual implementation. Stay tuned for more SignalR posts!

    Read the article

  • MVC 3 AdditionalMetadata Attribute with ViewBag to Render Dynamic UI

    - by Steve Michelotti
    A few months ago I blogged about using Model metadata to render a dynamic UI in MVC 2. The scenario in the post was that we might have a view model where the questions are conditionally displayed and therefore a dynamic UI is needed. To recap the previous post, the solution was to use a custom attribute called [QuestionId] in conjunction with an “ApplicableQuestions” collection to identify whether each question should be displayed. This allowed me to have a view model that looked like this: 1: [UIHint("ScalarQuestion")] 2: [DisplayName("First Name")] 3: [QuestionId("NB0021")] 4: public string FirstName { get; set; } 5: 6: [UIHint("ScalarQuestion")] 7: [DisplayName("Last Name")] 8: [QuestionId("NB0022")] 9: public string LastName { get; set; } 10: 11: [UIHint("ScalarQuestion")] 12: [QuestionId("NB0023")] 13: public int Age { get; set; } 14: 15: public IEnumerable<string> ApplicableQuestions { get; set; } At the same time, I was able to avoid repetitive IF statements for every single question in my view: 1: <%: Html.EditorFor(m => m.FirstName, new { applicableQuestions = Model.ApplicableQuestions })%> 2: <%: Html.EditorFor(m => m.LastName, new { applicableQuestions = Model.ApplicableQuestions })%> 3: <%: Html.EditorFor(m => m.Age, new { applicableQuestions = Model.ApplicableQuestions })%> by creating an Editor Template called “ScalarQuestion” that encapsulated the IF statement: 1: <%@ Control Language="C#" Inherits="System.Web.Mvc.ViewUserControl" %> 2: <%@ Import Namespace="DynamicQuestions.Models" %> 3: <%@ Import Namespace="System.Linq" %> 4: <% 5: var applicableQuestions = this.ViewData["applicableQuestions"] as IEnumerable<string>; 6: var questionAttr = this.ViewData.ModelMetadata.ContainerType.GetProperty(this.ViewData.ModelMetadata.PropertyName).GetCustomAttributes(typeof(QuestionIdAttribute), true) as QuestionIdAttribute[]; 7: string questionId = null; 8: if (questionAttr.Length > 0) 9: { 10: questionId = questionAttr[0].Id; 11: } 12: if (questionId != null && applicableQuestions.Contains(questionId)) { %> 13: <div> 14: <%: Html.Label("") %> 15: <%: Html.TextBox("", this.Model)%> 16: </div> 17: <% } %> You might want to go back and read the full post in order to get the full context. MVC 3 offers a couple of new features that make this scenario more elegant to implement. The first step is to use the new [AdditionalMetadata] attribute which, so far, appears to be an under appreciated new feature of MVC 3. With this attribute, I don’t need my custom [QuestionId] attribute anymore - now I can just write my view model like this: 1: [UIHint("ScalarQuestion")] 2: [DisplayName("First Name")] 3: [AdditionalMetadata("QuestionId", "NB0021")] 4: public string FirstName { get; set; } 5:   6: [UIHint("ScalarQuestion")] 7: [DisplayName("Last Name")] 8: [AdditionalMetadata("QuestionId", "NB0022")] 9: public string LastName { get; set; } 10:   11: [UIHint("ScalarQuestion")] 12: [AdditionalMetadata("QuestionId", "NB0023")] 13: public int Age { get; set; } Thus far, the documentation seems to be pretty sparse on the AdditionalMetadata attribute. It’s buried in the Other New Features section of the MVC 3 home page and, after showing the attribute on a view model property, it just says, “This metadata is made available to any display or editor template when a product view model is rendered. It is up to you to interpret the metadata information.” But what exactly does it look like for me to “interpret the metadata information”? Well, it turns out it makes the view much easier to work with. Here is the re-implemented ScalarQuestion template updated for MVC 3 and Razor: 1: @{ 2: object questionId; 3: ViewData.ModelMetadata.AdditionalValues.TryGetValue("QuestionId", out questionId); 4: if (ViewBag.applicableQuestions.Contains((string)questionId)) { 5: <div> 6: @Html.LabelFor(m => m) 7: @Html.TextBoxFor(m => m) 8: </div> 9: } 10: } So we’ve gone from 17 lines of code (in the MVC 2 version) to about 7-8 lines of code here. The first thing to notice is that in MVC 3 we now have a property called “AdditionalValues” that hangs off of the ModelMetadata property. This is automatically populated by any [AdditionalMetadata] attributes on the property. There is no more need for me to explicitly write Reflection code to GetCustomAttributes() and then check to see if those attributes were present. I can just call TryGetValue() on the dictionary to see if they were present. Secondly, the “applicableQuestions” anonymous type that I passed in from the calling view – in MVC 3 I now have a dynamic ViewBag property where I can just “dot into” the applicableQuestions with a nicer syntax than dictionary square bracket syntax. And there’s no problems calling the Contains() method on this dynamic object because at runtime the DLR has resolved that it is a generic List<string>. At this point you might be saying that, yes the view got much nicer than the MVC 2 version, but my view model got slightly worse.  In the previous version I had a nice [QuestionId] attribute but now, with the [AdditionalMetadata] attribute, I have to type the string “QuestionId” for every single property and hope that I don’t make a typo. Well, the good news is that it’s easy to create your own attributes that can participate in the metadata’s additional values. The key is that the attribute must implement that IMetadataAware interface and populate the AdditionalValues dictionary in the OnMetadataCreated() method: 1: public class QuestionIdAttribute : Attribute, IMetadataAware 2: { 3: public string Id { get; set; } 4:   5: public QuestionIdAttribute(string id) 6: { 7: this.Id = id; 8: } 9:   10: public void OnMetadataCreated(ModelMetadata metadata) 11: { 12: metadata.AdditionalValues["QuestionId"] = this.Id; 13: } 14: } This now allows me to encapuslate my “QuestionId” string in just one place and get back to my original attribute which can be used like this: [QuestionId(“NB0021”)]. The [AdditionalMetadata] attribute is a powerful and under-appreciated new feature of MVC 3. Combined with the dynamic ViewBag property, you can do some really interesting things with your applications with less code and ceremony.

    Read the article

  • Enabling Service Availability in WCF Services

    - by cibrax
    It is very important for the enterprise to know which services are operational at any given point. There are many factors that can affect the availability of the services, some of them are external like a database not responding or any dependant service not working. However, in some cases, you only want to know whether a service is up or down, so a simple heart-beat mechanism with “Ping” messages would do the trick. Unfortunately, WCF does not provide a built-in mechanism to support this functionality, and you probably don’t to implement a “Ping” operation in any service that you have out there. For solving this in a generic way, there is a WCF extensibility point that comes to help us, the “Operation Invokers”. In a nutshell, an operation invoker is the class responsible invoking the service method with a set of parameters and generate the output parameters with the return value. What I am going to do here is to implement a custom operation invoker that intercepts any call to the service, and detects whether a “Ping” header was attached to the message. If the “Ping” header is detected, the operation invoker returns a new header to tell the client that the service is alive, and the real operation execution is omitted. In that way, we have a simple heart beat mechanism based on the messages that include a "Ping” header, so the client application can determine at any point whether the service is up or down. My operation invoker wraps the default implementation attached by default to any operation by WCF. internal class PingOperationInvoker : IOperationInvoker { IOperationInvoker innerInvoker; object[] outputs = null; object returnValue = null; public const string PingHeaderName = "Ping"; public const string PingHeaderNamespace = "http://tellago.serviceModel"; public PingOperationInvoker(IOperationInvoker innerInvoker, OperationDescription description) { this.innerInvoker = innerInvoker; outputs = description.SyncMethod.GetParameters() .Where(p => p.IsOut) .Select(p => DefaultForType(p.ParameterType)).ToArray(); var returnValue = DefaultForType(description.SyncMethod.ReturnType); } private static object DefaultForType(Type targetType) { return targetType.IsValueType ? Activator.CreateInstance(targetType) : null; } public object Invoke(object instance, object[] inputs, out object[] outputs) { object returnValue; if (Invoke(out returnValue, out outputs)) { return returnValue; } else { return this.innerInvoker.Invoke(instance, inputs, out outputs); } } private bool Invoke(out object returnValue, out object[] outputs) { object untypedProperty = null; if (OperationContext.Current .IncomingMessageProperties.TryGetValue(HttpRequestMessageProperty.Name, out untypedProperty)) { var httpRequestProperty = untypedProperty as HttpRequestMessageProperty; if (httpRequestProperty != null) { if (httpRequestProperty.Headers[PingHeaderName] != null) { outputs = this.outputs; if (OperationContext.Current .IncomingMessageProperties.TryGetValue(HttpRequestMessageProperty.Name, out untypedProperty)) { var httpResponseProperty = untypedProperty as HttpResponseMessageProperty; httpResponseProperty.Headers.Add(PingHeaderName, "Ok"); } returnValue = this.returnValue; return true; } } } var headers = OperationContext.Current.IncomingMessageHeaders; if (headers.FindHeader(PingHeaderName, PingHeaderNamespace) > -1) { outputs = this.outputs; MessageHeader<string> header = new MessageHeader<string>("Ok"); var untyped = header.GetUntypedHeader(PingHeaderName, PingHeaderNamespace); OperationContext.Current.OutgoingMessageHeaders.Add(untyped); returnValue = this.returnValue; return true; } returnValue = null; outputs = null; return false; } } The implementation above looks for the “Ping” header either in the Http Request or the Soap message. The next step is to implement a behavior for attaching this operation invoker to the services we want to monitor. [AttributeUsage(AttributeTargets.Method | AttributeTargets.Class, AllowMultiple = false, Inherited = true)] public class PingBehavior : Attribute, IServiceBehavior, IOperationBehavior { public void AddBindingParameters(ServiceDescription serviceDescription, ServiceHostBase serviceHostBase, Collection<ServiceEndpoint> endpoints, BindingParameterCollection bindingParameters) { } public void ApplyDispatchBehavior(ServiceDescription serviceDescription, ServiceHostBase serviceHostBase) { } public void Validate(ServiceDescription serviceDescription, ServiceHostBase serviceHostBase) { foreach (var endpoint in serviceDescription.Endpoints) { foreach (var operation in endpoint.Contract.Operations) { if (operation.Behaviors.Find<PingBehavior>() == null) operation.Behaviors.Add(this); } } } public void AddBindingParameters(OperationDescription operationDescription, BindingParameterCollection bindingParameters) { } public void ApplyClientBehavior(OperationDescription operationDescription, ClientOperation clientOperation) { } public void ApplyDispatchBehavior(OperationDescription operationDescription, DispatchOperation dispatchOperation) { dispatchOperation.Invoker = new PingOperationInvoker(dispatchOperation.Invoker, operationDescription); } public void Validate(OperationDescription operationDescription) { } } As an operation invoker can only be added in an “operation behavior”, a trick I learned in the past is that you can implement a service behavior as well and use the “Validate” method to inject it in all the operations, so the final configuration is much easier and cleaner. You only need to decorate the service with a simple attribute to enable the “Ping” functionality. [PingBehavior] public class HelloWorldService : IHelloWorld { public string Hello(string name) { return "Hello " + name; } } On the other hand, the client application needs to send a dummy message with a “Ping” header to detect whether the service is available or not. In order to simplify this task, I created a extension method in the WCF client channel to do this work. public static class ClientChannelExtensions { const string PingNamespace = "http://tellago.serviceModel"; const string PingName = "Ping"; public static bool IsAvailable<TChannel>(this IClientChannel channel, Action<TChannel> operation) { try { using (OperationContextScope scope = new OperationContextScope(channel)) { MessageHeader<string> header = new MessageHeader<string>(PingName); var untyped = header.GetUntypedHeader(PingName, PingNamespace); OperationContext.Current.OutgoingMessageHeaders.Add(untyped); try { operation((TChannel)channel); var headers = OperationContext.Current.IncomingMessageHeaders; if (headers.Any(h => h.Name == PingName && h.Namespace == PingNamespace)) { return true; } else { return false; } } catch (CommunicationException) { return false; } } } catch (Exception) { return false; } } } This extension method basically adds a “Ping” header to the request message, executes the operation passed as argument (Action<TChannel> operation), and looks for the corresponding “Ping” header in the response to see the results. The client application can use this extension with a single line of code, var client = new ServiceReference.HelloWorldClient(); var isAvailable = client.InnerChannel.IsAvailable<IHelloWorld>((c) => c.Hello(null)); The “isAvailable” variable will tell the client application whether the service is available or not. You can download the complete implementation from this location.    

    Read the article

  • Design guideline for saving big byte stream in c# [migrated]

    - by Praveen
    I have an application where I am receiving big byte array very fast around per 50 miliseconds. The byte array contains some information like file name etc. The data (byte array ) may come from several sources. Each time I receive the data, I have to find the file name and save the data to that file name. I need some guide lines to how should I design it so that it works efficient. Following is my code... public class DataSaver { private static Dictionary<string, FileStream> _dictFileStream; public static void SaveData(byte[] byteArray) { string fileName = GetFileNameFromArray(byteArray); FileStream fs = GetFileStream(fileName); fs.Write(byteArray, 0, byteArray.Length); } private static FileStream GetFileStream(string fileName) { FileStream fs; bool hasStream = _dictFileStream.TryGetValue(fileName, out fs); if (!hasStream) { fs = new FileStream(fileName, FileMode.Append); _dictFileStream.Add(fileName, fs); } return fs; } public static void CloseSaver() { foreach (var key in _dictFileStream.Keys) { _dictFileStream[key].Close(); } } } How can I improve this code ? I need to create a thread maybe to do the saving.

    Read the article

  • Minecraft Style Chunk building problem

    - by David Torrey
    I'm having some problems with speed in my chunk engine. I timed it out, and in its current state it takes a total ~5 seconds per chunk to fill each face's list. I have a check to see if each face of a block is visible and if it is not visible, it skips it and moves on. I'm using a dictionary (unordered map) because it makes sense memorywise to just not have an entry if there is no block. I've tracked my problem down to testing if there is an entry, and accessing an entry if it does exist. If I remove the tests to see if there is an entry in the dictionary for an adjacent block, or if the block type itself is seethrough, it runs within about 2-4 milliseconds. so here's my question: Is there a faster way to check for an entry in a dictionary than .ContainsKey()? As an aside, I tried TryGetValue() and it doesn't really help with the speed that much. If I remove the ContainsKey() and keep the test where it does the IsSeeThrough for each block, it halves the time, but it's still about 2-3 seconds. It only drops to 2-4ms if I remove BOTH checks. Here is my code: using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; using System.Text; using System.Threading.Tasks; using System.Runtime.InteropServices; using OpenTK; using OpenTK.Graphics.OpenGL; using System.Drawing; namespace Anabelle_Lee { public enum BlockEnum { air = 0, dirt = 1, } [StructLayout(LayoutKind.Sequential,Pack=1)] public struct Coordinates<T1> { public T1 x; public T1 y; public T1 z; public override string ToString() { return "(" + x + "," + y + "," + z + ") : " + typeof(T1); } } public struct Sides<T1> { public T1 left; public T1 right; public T1 top; public T1 bottom; public T1 front; public T1 back; } public class Block { public int blockType; public bool SeeThrough() { switch (blockType) { case 0: return true; } return false ; } public override string ToString() { return ((BlockEnum)(blockType)).ToString(); } } class Chunk { private Dictionary<Coordinates<byte>, Block> mChunkData; //stores the block data private Sides<List<Coordinates<byte>>> mVBOVertexBuffer; private Sides<int> mVBOHandle; //private bool mIsChanged; private const byte mCHUNKSIZE = 16; public Chunk() { } public void InitializeChunk() { //create VBO references #if DEBUG Console.WriteLine ("Initializing Chunk"); #endif mChunkData = new Dictionary<Coordinates<byte> , Block>(); //mIsChanged = true; GL.GenBuffers(1, out mVBOHandle.left); GL.GenBuffers(1, out mVBOHandle.right); GL.GenBuffers(1, out mVBOHandle.top); GL.GenBuffers(1, out mVBOHandle.bottom); GL.GenBuffers(1, out mVBOHandle.front); GL.GenBuffers(1, out mVBOHandle.back); //make new list of vertexes for each face mVBOVertexBuffer.top = new List<Coordinates<byte>>(); mVBOVertexBuffer.bottom = new List<Coordinates<byte>>(); mVBOVertexBuffer.left = new List<Coordinates<byte>>(); mVBOVertexBuffer.right = new List<Coordinates<byte>>(); mVBOVertexBuffer.front = new List<Coordinates<byte>>(); mVBOVertexBuffer.back = new List<Coordinates<byte>>(); #if DEBUG Console.WriteLine("Chunk Initialized"); #endif } public void GenerateChunk() { #if DEBUG Console.WriteLine("Generating Chunk"); #endif for (byte i = 0; i < mCHUNKSIZE; i++) { for (byte j = 0; j < mCHUNKSIZE; j++) { for (byte k = 0; k < mCHUNKSIZE; k++) { Random blockLoc = new Random(); Coordinates<byte> randChunk = new Coordinates<byte> { x = i, y = j, z = k }; mChunkData.Add(randChunk, new Block()); mChunkData[randChunk].blockType = blockLoc.Next(0, 1); } } } #if DEBUG Console.WriteLine("Chunk Generated"); #endif } public void DeleteChunk() { //delete VBO references #if DEBUG Console.WriteLine("Deleting Chunk"); #endif GL.DeleteBuffers(1, ref mVBOHandle.left); GL.DeleteBuffers(1, ref mVBOHandle.right); GL.DeleteBuffers(1, ref mVBOHandle.top); GL.DeleteBuffers(1, ref mVBOHandle.bottom); GL.DeleteBuffers(1, ref mVBOHandle.front); GL.DeleteBuffers(1, ref mVBOHandle.back); //clear all vertex buffers ClearPolyLists(); #if DEBUG Console.WriteLine("Chunk Deleted"); #endif } public void UpdateChunk() { #if DEBUG Console.WriteLine("Updating Chunk"); #endif ClearPolyLists(); //prepare buffers //for every entry in mChunkData map foreach(KeyValuePair<Coordinates<byte>,Block> feBlockData in mChunkData) { Coordinates<byte> checkBlock = new Coordinates<byte> { x = feBlockData.Key.x, y = feBlockData.Key.y, z = feBlockData.Key.z }; //check for polygonson the left side of the cube if (checkBlock.x > 0) { //check to see if there is a key for current x - 1. if not, add the vector if (!IsVisible(checkBlock.x - 1, checkBlock.y, checkBlock.z)) { //add polygon AddPoly(checkBlock.x, checkBlock.y, checkBlock.z, mVBOHandle.left); } } else { //polygon is far left and should be added AddPoly(checkBlock.x, checkBlock.y, checkBlock.z, mVBOHandle.left); } //check for polygons on the right side of the cube if (checkBlock.x < mCHUNKSIZE - 1) { if (!IsVisible(checkBlock.x + 1, checkBlock.y, checkBlock.z)) { //add poly AddPoly(checkBlock.x, checkBlock.y, checkBlock.z, mVBOHandle.right); } } else { //poly for right add AddPoly(checkBlock.x, checkBlock.y, checkBlock.z, mVBOHandle.right); } if (checkBlock.y > 0) { //check to see if there is a key for current x - 1. if not, add the vector if (!IsVisible(checkBlock.x, checkBlock.y - 1, checkBlock.z)) { //add polygon AddPoly(checkBlock.x, checkBlock.y, checkBlock.z, mVBOHandle.bottom); } } else { //polygon is far left and should be added AddPoly(checkBlock.x, checkBlock.y, checkBlock.z, mVBOHandle.bottom); } //check for polygons on the right side of the cube if (checkBlock.y < mCHUNKSIZE - 1) { if (!IsVisible(checkBlock.x, checkBlock.y + 1, checkBlock.z)) { //add poly AddPoly(checkBlock.x, checkBlock.y, checkBlock.z, mVBOHandle.top); } } else { //poly for right add AddPoly(checkBlock.x, checkBlock.y, checkBlock.z, mVBOHandle.top); } if (checkBlock.z > 0) { //check to see if there is a key for current x - 1. if not, add the vector if (!IsVisible(checkBlock.x, checkBlock.y, checkBlock.z - 1)) { //add polygon AddPoly(checkBlock.x, checkBlock.y, checkBlock.z, mVBOHandle.back); } } else { //polygon is far left and should be added AddPoly(checkBlock.x, checkBlock.y, checkBlock.z, mVBOHandle.back); } //check for polygons on the right side of the cube if (checkBlock.z < mCHUNKSIZE - 1) { if (!IsVisible(checkBlock.x, checkBlock.y, checkBlock.z + 1)) { //add poly AddPoly(checkBlock.x, checkBlock.y, checkBlock.z, mVBOHandle.front); } } else { //poly for right add AddPoly(checkBlock.x, checkBlock.y, checkBlock.z, mVBOHandle.front); } } BuildBuffers(); #if DEBUG Console.WriteLine("Chunk Updated"); #endif } public void RenderChunk() { } public void LoadChunk() { #if DEBUG Console.WriteLine("Loading Chunk"); #endif #if DEBUG Console.WriteLine("Chunk Deleted"); #endif } public void SaveChunk() { #if DEBUG Console.WriteLine("Saving Chunk"); #endif #if DEBUG Console.WriteLine("Chunk Saved"); #endif } private bool IsVisible(int pX,int pY,int pZ) { Block testBlock; Coordinates<byte> checkBlock = new Coordinates<byte> { x = Convert.ToByte(pX), y = Convert.ToByte(pY), z = Convert.ToByte(pZ) }; if (mChunkData.TryGetValue(checkBlock,out testBlock )) //if data exists { if (testBlock.SeeThrough() == true) //if existing data is not seethrough { return true; } } return true; } private void AddPoly(byte pX, byte pY, byte pZ, int BufferSide) { //create temp array GL.BindBuffer(BufferTarget.ArrayBuffer, BufferSide); if (BufferSide == mVBOHandle.front) { //front face mVBOVertexBuffer.front.Add(new Coordinates<byte> { x = (byte)(pX) , y = (byte)(pY + 1), z = (byte)(pZ + 1) }); mVBOVertexBuffer.front.Add(new Coordinates<byte> { x = (byte)(pX) , y = (byte)(pY) , z = (byte)(pZ + 1) }); mVBOVertexBuffer.front.Add(new Coordinates<byte> { x = (byte)(pX + 1), y = (byte)(pY) , z = (byte)(pZ + 1) }); mVBOVertexBuffer.front.Add(new Coordinates<byte> { x = (byte)(pX + 1), y = (byte)(pY) , z = (byte)(pZ + 1) }); mVBOVertexBuffer.front.Add(new Coordinates<byte> { x = (byte)(pX + 1), y = (byte)(pY + 1), z = (byte)(pZ + 1) }); mVBOVertexBuffer.front.Add(new Coordinates<byte> { x = (byte)(pX) , y = (byte)(pY + 1), z = (byte)(pZ + 1) }); } else if (BufferSide == mVBOHandle.right) { //back face mVBOVertexBuffer.back.Add(new Coordinates<byte> { x = (byte)(pX + 1), y = (byte)(pY + 1), z = (byte)(pZ) }); mVBOVertexBuffer.back.Add(new Coordinates<byte> { x = (byte)(pX + 1), y = (byte)(pY) , z = (byte)(pZ) }); mVBOVertexBuffer.back.Add(new Coordinates<byte> { x = (byte)(pX) , y = (byte)(pY) , z = (byte)(pZ) }); mVBOVertexBuffer.back.Add(new Coordinates<byte> { x = (byte)(pX) , y = (byte)(pY) , z = (byte)(pZ) }); mVBOVertexBuffer.back.Add(new Coordinates<byte> { x = (byte)(pX) , y = (byte)(pY + 1), z = (byte)(pZ) }); mVBOVertexBuffer.back.Add(new Coordinates<byte> { x = (byte)(pX + 1), y = (byte)(pY + 1), z = (byte)(pZ) }); } else if (BufferSide == mVBOHandle.top) { //left face mVBOVertexBuffer.left.Add(new Coordinates<byte> { x = (byte)(pX), y = (byte)(pY + 1), z = (byte)(pZ) }); mVBOVertexBuffer.left.Add(new Coordinates<byte> { x = (byte)(pX), y = (byte)(pY) , z = (byte)(pZ) }); mVBOVertexBuffer.left.Add(new Coordinates<byte> { x = (byte)(pX), y = (byte)(pY) , z = (byte)(pZ + 1) }); mVBOVertexBuffer.left.Add(new Coordinates<byte> { x = (byte)(pX), y = (byte)(pY) , z = (byte)(pZ + 1) }); mVBOVertexBuffer.left.Add(new Coordinates<byte> { x = (byte)(pX), y = (byte)(pY + 1), z = (byte)(pZ + 1) }); mVBOVertexBuffer.left.Add(new Coordinates<byte> { x = (byte)(pX), y = (byte)(pY + 1), z = (byte)(pZ) }); } else if (BufferSide == mVBOHandle.bottom) { //right face mVBOVertexBuffer.right.Add(new Coordinates<byte> { x = (byte)(pX + 1), y = (byte)(pY + 1), z = (byte)(pZ + 1) }); mVBOVertexBuffer.right.Add(new Coordinates<byte> { x = (byte)(pX + 1), y = (byte)(pY) , z = (byte)(pZ + 1) }); mVBOVertexBuffer.right.Add(new Coordinates<byte> { x = (byte)(pX + 1), y = (byte)(pY) , z = (byte)(pZ) }); mVBOVertexBuffer.right.Add(new Coordinates<byte> { x = (byte)(pX + 1), y = (byte)(pY) , z = (byte)(pZ) }); mVBOVertexBuffer.right.Add(new Coordinates<byte> { x = (byte)(pX + 1), y = (byte)(pY + 1), z = (byte)(pZ) }); mVBOVertexBuffer.right.Add(new Coordinates<byte> { x = (byte)(pX + 1), y = (byte)(pY + 1), z = (byte)(pZ + 1) }); } else if (BufferSide == mVBOHandle.front) { //top face mVBOVertexBuffer.top.Add(new Coordinates<byte> { x = (byte)(pX) , y = (byte)(pY + 1), z = (byte)(pZ) }); mVBOVertexBuffer.top.Add(new Coordinates<byte> { x = (byte)(pX) , y = (byte)(pY + 1), z = (byte)(pZ + 1) }); mVBOVertexBuffer.top.Add(new Coordinates<byte> { x = (byte)(pX + 1), y = (byte)(pY + 1), z = (byte)(pZ + 1) }); mVBOVertexBuffer.top.Add(new Coordinates<byte> { x = (byte)(pX + 1), y = (byte)(pY + 1), z = (byte)(pZ + 1) }); mVBOVertexBuffer.top.Add(new Coordinates<byte> { x = (byte)(pX + 1), y = (byte)(pY + 1), z = (byte)(pZ) }); mVBOVertexBuffer.top.Add(new Coordinates<byte> { x = (byte)(pX) , y = (byte)(pY + 1), z = (byte)(pZ) }); } else if (BufferSide == mVBOHandle.back) { //bottom face mVBOVertexBuffer.bottom.Add(new Coordinates<byte> { x = (byte)(pX) , y = (byte)(pY), z = (byte)(pZ + 1) }); mVBOVertexBuffer.bottom.Add(new Coordinates<byte> { x = (byte)(pX) , y = (byte)(pY), z = (byte)(pZ) }); mVBOVertexBuffer.bottom.Add(new Coordinates<byte> { x = (byte)(pX + 1), y = (byte)(pY), z = (byte)(pZ) }); mVBOVertexBuffer.bottom.Add(new Coordinates<byte> { x = (byte)(pX + 1), y = (byte)(pY), z = (byte)(pZ) }); mVBOVertexBuffer.bottom.Add(new Coordinates<byte> { x = (byte)(pX + 1), y = (byte)(pY), z = (byte)(pZ + 1) }); mVBOVertexBuffer.bottom.Add(new Coordinates<byte> { x = (byte)(pX) , y = (byte)(pY), z = (byte)(pZ + 1) }); } } private void BuildBuffers() { #if DEBUG Console.WriteLine("Building Chunk Buffers"); #endif GL.BindBuffer(BufferTarget.ArrayBuffer, mVBOHandle.front); GL.BufferData(BufferTarget.ArrayBuffer, (IntPtr)(Marshal.SizeOf(new Coordinates<byte>()) * mVBOVertexBuffer.front.Count), mVBOVertexBuffer.front.ToArray(), BufferUsageHint.StaticDraw); GL.BindBuffer(BufferTarget.ArrayBuffer, mVBOHandle.back); GL.BufferData(BufferTarget.ArrayBuffer, (IntPtr)(Marshal.SizeOf(new Coordinates<byte>()) * mVBOVertexBuffer.back.Count), mVBOVertexBuffer.back.ToArray(), BufferUsageHint.StaticDraw); GL.BindBuffer(BufferTarget.ArrayBuffer, mVBOHandle.left); GL.BufferData(BufferTarget.ArrayBuffer, (IntPtr)(Marshal.SizeOf(new Coordinates<byte>()) * mVBOVertexBuffer.left.Count), mVBOVertexBuffer.left.ToArray(), BufferUsageHint.StaticDraw); GL.BindBuffer(BufferTarget.ArrayBuffer, mVBOHandle.right); GL.BufferData(BufferTarget.ArrayBuffer, (IntPtr)(Marshal.SizeOf(new Coordinates<byte>()) * mVBOVertexBuffer.right.Count), mVBOVertexBuffer.right.ToArray(), BufferUsageHint.StaticDraw); GL.BindBuffer(BufferTarget.ArrayBuffer, mVBOHandle.top); GL.BufferData(BufferTarget.ArrayBuffer, (IntPtr)(Marshal.SizeOf(new Coordinates<byte>()) * mVBOVertexBuffer.top.Count), mVBOVertexBuffer.top.ToArray(), BufferUsageHint.StaticDraw); GL.BindBuffer(BufferTarget.ArrayBuffer, mVBOHandle.bottom); GL.BufferData(BufferTarget.ArrayBuffer, (IntPtr)(Marshal.SizeOf(new Coordinates<byte>()) * mVBOVertexBuffer.bottom.Count), mVBOVertexBuffer.bottom.ToArray(), BufferUsageHint.StaticDraw); GL.BindBuffer(BufferTarget.ArrayBuffer,0); #if DEBUG Console.WriteLine("Chunk Buffers Built"); #endif } private void ClearPolyLists() { #if DEBUG Console.WriteLine("Clearing Polygon Lists"); #endif mVBOVertexBuffer.top.Clear(); mVBOVertexBuffer.bottom.Clear(); mVBOVertexBuffer.left.Clear(); mVBOVertexBuffer.right.Clear(); mVBOVertexBuffer.front.Clear(); mVBOVertexBuffer.back.Clear(); #if DEBUG Console.WriteLine("Polygon Lists Cleared"); #endif } }//END CLASS }//END NAMESPACE

    Read the article

  • Adding SQL Cache Dependencies to the Loosely coupled .NET Cache Provider

    - by Rhames
    This post adds SQL Cache Dependency support to the loosely coupled .NET Cache Provider that I described in the previous post (http://geekswithblogs.net/Rhames/archive/2012/09/11/loosely-coupled-.net-cache-provider-using-dependency-injection.aspx). The sample code is available on github at https://github.com/RobinHames/CacheProvider.git. Each time we want to apply a cache dependency to a call to fetch or cache a data item we need to supply an instance of the relevant dependency implementation. This suggests an Abstract Factory will be useful to create cache dependencies as needed. We can then use Dependency Injection to inject the factory into the relevant consumer. Castle Windsor provides a typed factory facility that will be utilised to implement the cache dependency abstract factory (see http://docs.castleproject.org/Windsor.Typed-Factory-Facility-interface-based-factories.ashx). Cache Dependency Interfaces First I created a set of cache dependency interfaces in the domain layer, which can be used to pass a cache dependency into the cache provider. ICacheDependency The ICacheDependency interface is simply an empty interface that is used as a parent for the specific cache dependency interfaces. This will allow us to place a generic constraint on the Cache Dependency Factory, and will give us a type that can be passed into the relevant Cache Provider methods. namespace CacheDiSample.Domain.CacheInterfaces { public interface ICacheDependency { } }   ISqlCacheDependency.cs The ISqlCacheDependency interface provides specific SQL caching details, such as a Sql Command or a database connection and table. It is the concrete implementation of this interface that will be created by the factory in passed into the Cache Provider. using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; using System.Text;   namespace CacheDiSample.Domain.CacheInterfaces { public interface ISqlCacheDependency : ICacheDependency { ISqlCacheDependency Initialise(string databaseConnectionName, string tableName); ISqlCacheDependency Initialise(System.Data.SqlClient.SqlCommand sqlCommand); } } If we want other types of cache dependencies, such as by key or file, interfaces may be created to support these (the sample code includes an IKeyCacheDependency interface). Modifying ICacheProvider to accept Cache Dependencies Next I modified the exisitng ICacheProvider<T> interface so that cache dependencies may be passed into a Fetch method call. I did this by adding two overloads to the existing Fetch methods, which take an IEnumerable<ICacheDependency> parameter (the IEnumerable allows more than one cache dependency to be included). I also added a method to create cache dependencies. This means that the implementation of the Cache Provider will require a dependency on the Cache Dependency Factory. It is pretty much down to personal choice as to whether this approach is taken, or whether the Cache Dependency Factory is injected directly into the repository or other consumer of Cache Provider. I think, because the cache dependency cannot be used without the Cache Provider, placing the dependency on the factory into the Cache Provider implementation is cleaner. ICacheProvider.cs using System; using System.Collections.Generic;   namespace CacheDiSample.Domain.CacheInterfaces { public interface ICacheProvider<T> { T Fetch(string key, Func<T> retrieveData, DateTime? absoluteExpiry, TimeSpan? relativeExpiry); T Fetch(string key, Func<T> retrieveData, DateTime? absoluteExpiry, TimeSpan? relativeExpiry, IEnumerable<ICacheDependency> cacheDependencies);   IEnumerable<T> Fetch(string key, Func<IEnumerable<T>> retrieveData, DateTime? absoluteExpiry, TimeSpan? relativeExpiry); IEnumerable<T> Fetch(string key, Func<IEnumerable<T>> retrieveData, DateTime? absoluteExpiry, TimeSpan? relativeExpiry, IEnumerable<ICacheDependency> cacheDependencies);   U CreateCacheDependency<U>() where U : ICacheDependency; } }   Cache Dependency Factory Next I created the interface for the Cache Dependency Factory in the domain layer. ICacheDependencyFactory.cs namespace CacheDiSample.Domain.CacheInterfaces { public interface ICacheDependencyFactory { T Create<T>() where T : ICacheDependency;   void Release<T>(T cacheDependency) where T : ICacheDependency; } }   I used the ICacheDependency parent interface as a generic constraint on the create and release methods in the factory interface. Now the interfaces are in place, I moved on to the concrete implementations. ISqlCacheDependency Concrete Implementation The concrete implementation of ISqlCacheDependency will need to provide an instance of System.Web.Caching.SqlCacheDependency to the Cache Provider implementation. Unfortunately this class is sealed, so I cannot simply inherit from this. Instead, I created an interface called IAspNetCacheDependency that will provide a Create method to create an instance of the relevant System.Web.Caching Cache Dependency type. This interface is specific to the ASP.NET implementation of the Cache Provider, so it should be defined in the same layer as the concrete implementation of the Cache Provider (the MVC UI layer in the sample code). IAspNetCacheDependency.cs using System.Web.Caching;   namespace CacheDiSample.CacheProviders { public interface IAspNetCacheDependency { CacheDependency CreateAspNetCacheDependency(); } }   Next, I created the concrete implementation of the ISqlCacheDependency interface. This class also implements the IAspNetCacheDependency interface. This concrete implementation also is defined in the same layer as the Cache Provider implementation. AspNetSqlCacheDependency.cs using System.Web.Caching; using CacheDiSample.Domain.CacheInterfaces;   namespace CacheDiSample.CacheProviders { public class AspNetSqlCacheDependency : ISqlCacheDependency, IAspNetCacheDependency { private string databaseConnectionName;   private string tableName;   private System.Data.SqlClient.SqlCommand sqlCommand;   #region ISqlCacheDependency Members   public ISqlCacheDependency Initialise(string databaseConnectionName, string tableName) { this.databaseConnectionName = databaseConnectionName; this.tableName = tableName; return this; }   public ISqlCacheDependency Initialise(System.Data.SqlClient.SqlCommand sqlCommand) { this.sqlCommand = sqlCommand; return this; }   #endregion   #region IAspNetCacheDependency Members   public System.Web.Caching.CacheDependency CreateAspNetCacheDependency() { if (sqlCommand != null) return new SqlCacheDependency(sqlCommand); else return new SqlCacheDependency(databaseConnectionName, tableName); }   #endregion   } }   ICacheProvider Concrete Implementation The ICacheProvider interface is implemented by the CacheProvider class. This implementation is modified to include the changes to the ICacheProvider interface. First I needed to inject the Cache Dependency Factory into the Cache Provider: private ICacheDependencyFactory cacheDependencyFactory;   public CacheProvider(ICacheDependencyFactory cacheDependencyFactory) { if (cacheDependencyFactory == null) throw new ArgumentNullException("cacheDependencyFactory");   this.cacheDependencyFactory = cacheDependencyFactory; }   Next I implemented the CreateCacheDependency method, which simply passes on the create request to the factory: public U CreateCacheDependency<U>() where U : ICacheDependency { return this.cacheDependencyFactory.Create<U>(); }   The signature of the FetchAndCache helper method was modified to take an additional IEnumerable<ICacheDependency> parameter:   private U FetchAndCache<U>(string key, Func<U> retrieveData, DateTime? absoluteExpiry, TimeSpan? relativeExpiry, IEnumerable<ICacheDependency> cacheDependencies) and the following code added to create the relevant System.Web.Caching.CacheDependency object for any dependencies and pass them to the HttpContext Cache: CacheDependency aspNetCacheDependencies = null;   if (cacheDependencies != null) { if (cacheDependencies.Count() == 1) // We know that the implementations of ICacheDependency will also implement IAspNetCacheDependency // so we can use a cast here and call the CreateAspNetCacheDependency() method aspNetCacheDependencies = ((IAspNetCacheDependency)cacheDependencies.ElementAt(0)).CreateAspNetCacheDependency(); else if (cacheDependencies.Count() > 1) { AggregateCacheDependency aggregateCacheDependency = new AggregateCacheDependency(); foreach (ICacheDependency cacheDependency in cacheDependencies) { // We know that the implementations of ICacheDependency will also implement IAspNetCacheDependency // so we can use a cast here and call the CreateAspNetCacheDependency() method aggregateCacheDependency.Add(((IAspNetCacheDependency)cacheDependency).CreateAspNetCacheDependency()); } aspNetCacheDependencies = aggregateCacheDependency; } }   HttpContext.Current.Cache.Insert(key, value, aspNetCacheDependencies, absoluteExpiry.Value, relativeExpiry.Value);   The full code listing for the modified CacheProvider class is shown below: using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; using System.Web; using System.Web.Caching; using CacheDiSample.Domain.CacheInterfaces;   namespace CacheDiSample.CacheProviders { public class CacheProvider<T> : ICacheProvider<T> { private ICacheDependencyFactory cacheDependencyFactory;   public CacheProvider(ICacheDependencyFactory cacheDependencyFactory) { if (cacheDependencyFactory == null) throw new ArgumentNullException("cacheDependencyFactory");   this.cacheDependencyFactory = cacheDependencyFactory; }   public T Fetch(string key, Func<T> retrieveData, DateTime? absoluteExpiry, TimeSpan? relativeExpiry) { return FetchAndCache<T>(key, retrieveData, absoluteExpiry, relativeExpiry, null); }   public T Fetch(string key, Func<T> retrieveData, DateTime? absoluteExpiry, TimeSpan? relativeExpiry, IEnumerable<ICacheDependency> cacheDependencies) { return FetchAndCache<T>(key, retrieveData, absoluteExpiry, relativeExpiry, cacheDependencies); }   public IEnumerable<T> Fetch(string key, Func<IEnumerable<T>> retrieveData, DateTime? absoluteExpiry, TimeSpan? relativeExpiry) { return FetchAndCache<IEnumerable<T>>(key, retrieveData, absoluteExpiry, relativeExpiry, null); }   public IEnumerable<T> Fetch(string key, Func<IEnumerable<T>> retrieveData, DateTime? absoluteExpiry, TimeSpan? relativeExpiry, IEnumerable<ICacheDependency> cacheDependencies) { return FetchAndCache<IEnumerable<T>>(key, retrieveData, absoluteExpiry, relativeExpiry, cacheDependencies); }   public U CreateCacheDependency<U>() where U : ICacheDependency { return this.cacheDependencyFactory.Create<U>(); }   #region Helper Methods   private U FetchAndCache<U>(string key, Func<U> retrieveData, DateTime? absoluteExpiry, TimeSpan? relativeExpiry, IEnumerable<ICacheDependency> cacheDependencies) { U value; if (!TryGetValue<U>(key, out value)) { value = retrieveData(); if (!absoluteExpiry.HasValue) absoluteExpiry = Cache.NoAbsoluteExpiration;   if (!relativeExpiry.HasValue) relativeExpiry = Cache.NoSlidingExpiration;   CacheDependency aspNetCacheDependencies = null;   if (cacheDependencies != null) { if (cacheDependencies.Count() == 1) // We know that the implementations of ICacheDependency will also implement IAspNetCacheDependency // so we can use a cast here and call the CreateAspNetCacheDependency() method aspNetCacheDependencies = ((IAspNetCacheDependency)cacheDependencies.ElementAt(0)).CreateAspNetCacheDependency(); else if (cacheDependencies.Count() > 1) { AggregateCacheDependency aggregateCacheDependency = new AggregateCacheDependency(); foreach (ICacheDependency cacheDependency in cacheDependencies) { // We know that the implementations of ICacheDependency will also implement IAspNetCacheDependency // so we can use a cast here and call the CreateAspNetCacheDependency() method aggregateCacheDependency.Add( ((IAspNetCacheDependency)cacheDependency).CreateAspNetCacheDependency()); } aspNetCacheDependencies = aggregateCacheDependency; } }   HttpContext.Current.Cache.Insert(key, value, aspNetCacheDependencies, absoluteExpiry.Value, relativeExpiry.Value);   } return value; }   private bool TryGetValue<U>(string key, out U value) { object cachedValue = HttpContext.Current.Cache.Get(key); if (cachedValue == null) { value = default(U); return false; } else { try { value = (U)cachedValue; return true; } catch { value = default(U); return false; } } }   #endregion } }   Wiring up the DI Container Now the implementations for the Cache Dependency are in place, I wired them up in the existing Windsor CacheInstaller. First I needed to register the implementation of the ISqlCacheDependency interface: container.Register( Component.For<ISqlCacheDependency>() .ImplementedBy<AspNetSqlCacheDependency>() .LifestyleTransient());   Next I registered the Cache Dependency Factory. Notice that I have not implemented the ICacheDependencyFactory interface. Castle Windsor will do this for me by using the Type Factory Facility. I do need to bring the Castle.Facilities.TypedFacility namespace into scope: using Castle.Facilities.TypedFactory;   Then I registered the factory: container.AddFacility<TypedFactoryFacility>();   container.Register( Component.For<ICacheDependencyFactory>() .AsFactory()); The full code for the CacheInstaller class is: using Castle.MicroKernel.Registration; using Castle.MicroKernel.SubSystems.Configuration; using Castle.Windsor; using Castle.Facilities.TypedFactory;   using CacheDiSample.Domain.CacheInterfaces; using CacheDiSample.CacheProviders;   namespace CacheDiSample.WindsorInstallers { public class CacheInstaller : IWindsorInstaller { public void Install(IWindsorContainer container, IConfigurationStore store) { container.Register( Component.For(typeof(ICacheProvider<>)) .ImplementedBy(typeof(CacheProvider<>)) .LifestyleTransient());   container.Register( Component.For<ISqlCacheDependency>() .ImplementedBy<AspNetSqlCacheDependency>() .LifestyleTransient());   container.AddFacility<TypedFactoryFacility>();   container.Register( Component.For<ICacheDependencyFactory>() .AsFactory()); } } }   Configuring the ASP.NET SQL Cache Dependency There are a couple of configuration steps required to enable SQL Cache Dependency for the application and database. From the Visual Studio Command Prompt, the following commands should be used to enable the Cache Polling of the relevant database tables: aspnet_regsql -S <servername> -E -d <databasename> –ed aspnet_regsql -S <servername> -E -d CacheSample –et –t <tablename>   (The –t option should be repeated for each table that is to be made available for cache dependencies). Finally the SQL Cache Polling needs to be enabled by adding the following configuration to the <system.web> section of web.config: <caching> <sqlCacheDependency pollTime="10000" enabled="true"> <databases> <add name="BloggingContext" connectionStringName="BloggingContext"/> </databases> </sqlCacheDependency> </caching>   (obviously the name and connection string name should be altered as required). Using a SQL Cache Dependency Now all the coding is complete. To specify a SQL Cache Dependency, I can modify my BlogRepositoryWithCaching decorator class (see the earlier post) as follows: public IList<Blog> GetAll() { var sqlCacheDependency = cacheProvider.CreateCacheDependency<ISqlCacheDependency>() .Initialise("BloggingContext", "Blogs");   ICacheDependency[] cacheDependencies = new ICacheDependency[] { sqlCacheDependency };   string key = string.Format("CacheDiSample.DataAccess.GetAll");   return cacheProvider.Fetch(key, () => { return parentBlogRepository.GetAll(); }, null, null, cacheDependencies) .ToList(); }   This will add a dependency of the “Blogs” table in the database. The data will remain in the cache until the contents of this table change, then the cache item will be invalidated, and the next call to the GetAll() repository method will be routed to the parent repository to refresh the data from the database.

    Read the article

  • Loosely coupled .NET Cache Provider using Dependency Injection

    - by Rhames
    I have recently been reading the excellent book “Dependency Injection in .NET”, written by Mark Seemann. I do not generally buy software development related books, as I never seem to have the time to read them, but I have found the time to read Mark’s book, and it was time well spent I think. Reading the ideas around Dependency Injection made me realise that the Cache Provider code I wrote about earlier (see http://geekswithblogs.net/Rhames/archive/2011/01/10/using-the-asp.net-cache-to-cache-data-in-a-model.aspx) could be refactored to use Dependency Injection, which should produce cleaner code. The goals are to: Separate the cache provider implementation (using the ASP.NET data cache) from the consumers (loose coupling). This will also mean that the dependency on System.Web for the cache provider does not ripple down into the layers where it is being consumed (such as the domain layer). Provide a decorator pattern to allow a consumer of the cache provider to be implemented separately from the base consumer (i.e. if we have a base repository, we can decorate this with a caching version). Although I used the term repository, in reality the cache consumer could be just about anything. Use constructor injection to provide the Dependency Injection, with a suitable DI container (I use Castle Windsor). The sample code for this post is available on github, https://github.com/RobinHames/CacheProvider.git ICacheProvider In the sample code, the key interface is ICacheProvider, which is in the domain layer. 1: using System; 2: using System.Collections.Generic; 3:   4: namespace CacheDiSample.Domain 5: { 6: public interface ICacheProvider<T> 7: { 8: T Fetch(string key, Func<T> retrieveData, DateTime? absoluteExpiry, TimeSpan? relativeExpiry); 9: IEnumerable<T> Fetch(string key, Func<IEnumerable<T>> retrieveData, DateTime? absoluteExpiry, TimeSpan? relativeExpiry); 10: } 11: }   This interface contains two methods to retrieve data from the cache, either as a single instance or as an IEnumerable. the second paramerter is of type Func<T>. This is the method used to retrieve data if nothing is found in the cache. The ASP.NET implementation of the ICacheProvider interface needs to live in a project that has a reference to system.web, typically this will be the root UI project, or it could be a separate project. The key thing is that the domain or data access layers do not need system.web references adding to them. In my sample MVC application, the CacheProvider is implemented in the UI project, in a folder called “CacheProviders”: 1: using System; 2: using System.Collections.Generic; 3: using System.Linq; 4: using System.Web; 5: using System.Web.Caching; 6: using CacheDiSample.Domain; 7:   8: namespace CacheDiSample.CacheProvider 9: { 10: public class CacheProvider<T> : ICacheProvider<T> 11: { 12: public T Fetch(string key, Func<T> retrieveData, DateTime? absoluteExpiry, TimeSpan? relativeExpiry) 13: { 14: return FetchAndCache<T>(key, retrieveData, absoluteExpiry, relativeExpiry); 15: } 16:   17: public IEnumerable<T> Fetch(string key, Func<IEnumerable<T>> retrieveData, DateTime? absoluteExpiry, TimeSpan? relativeExpiry) 18: { 19: return FetchAndCache<IEnumerable<T>>(key, retrieveData, absoluteExpiry, relativeExpiry); 20: } 21:   22: #region Helper Methods 23:   24: private U FetchAndCache<U>(string key, Func<U> retrieveData, DateTime? absoluteExpiry, TimeSpan? relativeExpiry) 25: { 26: U value; 27: if (!TryGetValue<U>(key, out value)) 28: { 29: value = retrieveData(); 30: if (!absoluteExpiry.HasValue) 31: absoluteExpiry = Cache.NoAbsoluteExpiration; 32:   33: if (!relativeExpiry.HasValue) 34: relativeExpiry = Cache.NoSlidingExpiration; 35:   36: HttpContext.Current.Cache.Insert(key, value, null, absoluteExpiry.Value, relativeExpiry.Value); 37: } 38: return value; 39: } 40:   41: private bool TryGetValue<U>(string key, out U value) 42: { 43: object cachedValue = HttpContext.Current.Cache.Get(key); 44: if (cachedValue == null) 45: { 46: value = default(U); 47: return false; 48: } 49: else 50: { 51: try 52: { 53: value = (U)cachedValue; 54: return true; 55: } 56: catch 57: { 58: value = default(U); 59: return false; 60: } 61: } 62: } 63:   64: #endregion 65:   66: } 67: }   The FetchAndCache helper method checks if the specified cache key exists, if it does not, the Func<U> retrieveData method is called, and the results are added to the cache. Using Castle Windsor to register the cache provider In the MVC UI project (my application root), Castle Windsor is used to register the CacheProvider implementation, using a Windsor Installer: 1: using Castle.MicroKernel.Registration; 2: using Castle.MicroKernel.SubSystems.Configuration; 3: using Castle.Windsor; 4:   5: using CacheDiSample.Domain; 6: using CacheDiSample.CacheProvider; 7:   8: namespace CacheDiSample.WindsorInstallers 9: { 10: public class CacheInstaller : IWindsorInstaller 11: { 12: public void Install(IWindsorContainer container, IConfigurationStore store) 13: { 14: container.Register( 15: Component.For(typeof(ICacheProvider<>)) 16: .ImplementedBy(typeof(CacheProvider<>)) 17: .LifestyleTransient()); 18: } 19: } 20: }   Note that the cache provider is registered as a open generic type. Consuming a Repository I have an existing couple of repository interfaces defined in my domain layer: IRepository.cs 1: using System; 2: using System.Collections.Generic; 3:   4: using CacheDiSample.Domain.Model; 5:   6: namespace CacheDiSample.Domain.Repositories 7: { 8: public interface IRepository<T> 9: where T : EntityBase 10: { 11: T GetById(int id); 12: IList<T> GetAll(); 13: } 14: }   IBlogRepository.cs 1: using System; 2: using CacheDiSample.Domain.Model; 3:   4: namespace CacheDiSample.Domain.Repositories 5: { 6: public interface IBlogRepository : IRepository<Blog> 7: { 8: Blog GetByName(string name); 9: } 10: }   These two repositories are implemented in the DataAccess layer, using Entity Framework to retrieve data (this is not important though). One important point is that in the BaseRepository implementation of IRepository, the methods are virtual. This will allow the decorator to override them. The BlogRepository is registered in a RepositoriesInstaller, again in the MVC UI project. 1: using Castle.MicroKernel.Registration; 2: using Castle.MicroKernel.SubSystems.Configuration; 3: using Castle.Windsor; 4:   5: using CacheDiSample.Domain.CacheDecorators; 6: using CacheDiSample.Domain.Repositories; 7: using CacheDiSample.DataAccess; 8:   9: namespace CacheDiSample.WindsorInstallers 10: { 11: public class RepositoriesInstaller : IWindsorInstaller 12: { 13: public void Install(IWindsorContainer container, IConfigurationStore store) 14: { 15: container.Register(Component.For<IBlogRepository>() 16: .ImplementedBy<BlogRepository>() 17: .LifestyleTransient() 18: .DependsOn(new 19: { 20: nameOrConnectionString = "BloggingContext" 21: })); 22: } 23: } 24: }   Now I can inject a dependency on the IBlogRepository into a consumer, such as a controller in my sample code: 1: using System; 2: using System.Collections.Generic; 3: using System.Linq; 4: using System.Web; 5: using System.Web.Mvc; 6:   7: using CacheDiSample.Domain.Repositories; 8: using CacheDiSample.Domain.Model; 9:   10: namespace CacheDiSample.Controllers 11: { 12: public class HomeController : Controller 13: { 14: private readonly IBlogRepository blogRepository; 15:   16: public HomeController(IBlogRepository blogRepository) 17: { 18: if (blogRepository == null) 19: throw new ArgumentNullException("blogRepository"); 20:   21: this.blogRepository = blogRepository; 22: } 23:   24: public ActionResult Index() 25: { 26: ViewBag.Message = "Welcome to ASP.NET MVC!"; 27:   28: var blogs = blogRepository.GetAll(); 29:   30: return View(new Models.HomeModel { Blogs = blogs }); 31: } 32:   33: public ActionResult About() 34: { 35: return View(); 36: } 37: } 38: }   Consuming the Cache Provider via a Decorator I used a Decorator pattern to consume the cache provider, this means my repositories follow the open/closed principle, as they do not require any modifications to implement the caching. It also means that my controllers do not have any knowledge of the caching taking place, as the DI container will simply inject the decorator instead of the root implementation of the repository. The first step is to implement a BlogRepository decorator, with the caching logic in it. Note that this can reside in the domain layer, as it does not require any knowledge of the data access methods. BlogRepositoryWithCaching.cs 1: using System; 2: using System.Collections.Generic; 3: using System.Linq; 4: using System.Text; 5:   6: using CacheDiSample.Domain.Model; 7: using CacheDiSample.Domain; 8: using CacheDiSample.Domain.Repositories; 9:   10: namespace CacheDiSample.Domain.CacheDecorators 11: { 12: public class BlogRepositoryWithCaching : IBlogRepository 13: { 14: // The generic cache provider, injected by DI 15: private ICacheProvider<Blog> cacheProvider; 16: // The decorated blog repository, injected by DI 17: private IBlogRepository parentBlogRepository; 18:   19: public BlogRepositoryWithCaching(IBlogRepository parentBlogRepository, ICacheProvider<Blog> cacheProvider) 20: { 21: if (parentBlogRepository == null) 22: throw new ArgumentNullException("parentBlogRepository"); 23:   24: this.parentBlogRepository = parentBlogRepository; 25:   26: if (cacheProvider == null) 27: throw new ArgumentNullException("cacheProvider"); 28:   29: this.cacheProvider = cacheProvider; 30: } 31:   32: public Blog GetByName(string name) 33: { 34: string key = string.Format("CacheDiSample.DataAccess.GetByName.{0}", name); 35: // hard code 5 minute expiry! 36: TimeSpan relativeCacheExpiry = new TimeSpan(0, 5, 0); 37: return cacheProvider.Fetch(key, () => 38: { 39: return parentBlogRepository.GetByName(name); 40: }, 41: null, relativeCacheExpiry); 42: } 43:   44: public Blog GetById(int id) 45: { 46: string key = string.Format("CacheDiSample.DataAccess.GetById.{0}", id); 47:   48: // hard code 5 minute expiry! 49: TimeSpan relativeCacheExpiry = new TimeSpan(0, 5, 0); 50: return cacheProvider.Fetch(key, () => 51: { 52: return parentBlogRepository.GetById(id); 53: }, 54: null, relativeCacheExpiry); 55: } 56:   57: public IList<Blog> GetAll() 58: { 59: string key = string.Format("CacheDiSample.DataAccess.GetAll"); 60:   61: // hard code 5 minute expiry! 62: TimeSpan relativeCacheExpiry = new TimeSpan(0, 5, 0); 63: return cacheProvider.Fetch(key, () => 64: { 65: return parentBlogRepository.GetAll(); 66: }, 67: null, relativeCacheExpiry) 68: .ToList(); 69: } 70: } 71: }   The key things in this caching repository are: I inject into the repository the ICacheProvider<Blog> implementation, via the constructor. This will make the cache provider functionality available to the repository. I inject the parent IBlogRepository implementation (which has the actual data access code), via the constructor. This will allow the methods implemented in the parent to be called if nothing is found in the cache. I override each of the methods implemented in the repository, including those implemented in the generic BaseRepository. Each override of these methods follows the same pattern. It makes a call to the CacheProvider.Fetch method, and passes in the parentBlogRepository implementation of the method as the retrieval method, to be used if nothing is present in the cache. Configuring the Caching Repository in the DI Container The final piece of the jigsaw is to tell Castle Windsor to use the BlogRepositoryWithCaching implementation of IBlogRepository, but to inject the actual Data Access implementation into this decorator. This is easily achieved by modifying the RepositoriesInstaller to use Windsor’s implicit decorator wiring: 1: using Castle.MicroKernel.Registration; 2: using Castle.MicroKernel.SubSystems.Configuration; 3: using Castle.Windsor; 4:   5: using CacheDiSample.Domain.CacheDecorators; 6: using CacheDiSample.Domain.Repositories; 7: using CacheDiSample.DataAccess; 8:   9: namespace CacheDiSample.WindsorInstallers 10: { 11: public class RepositoriesInstaller : IWindsorInstaller 12: { 13: public void Install(IWindsorContainer container, IConfigurationStore store) 14: { 15:   16: // Use Castle Windsor implicit wiring for the block repository decorator 17: // Register the outermost decorator first 18: container.Register(Component.For<IBlogRepository>() 19: .ImplementedBy<BlogRepositoryWithCaching>() 20: .LifestyleTransient()); 21: // Next register the IBlogRepository inmplementation to inject into the outer decorator 22: container.Register(Component.For<IBlogRepository>() 23: .ImplementedBy<BlogRepository>() 24: .LifestyleTransient() 25: .DependsOn(new 26: { 27: nameOrConnectionString = "BloggingContext" 28: })); 29: } 30: } 31: }   This is all that is needed. Now if the consumer of the repository makes a call to the repositories method, it will be routed via the caching mechanism. You can test this by stepping through the code, and seeing that the DataAccess.BlogRepository code is only called if there is no data in the cache, or this has expired. The next step is to add the SQL Cache Dependency support into this pattern, this will be a future post.

    Read the article

  • C# Dictionary as a ListBox.DataSource

    - by Steve H.
    I am trying to bind a dictionary as a DataSource to a ListBox. The solution in How to bind a dicationary to a ListBox in winforms will not work for me because my dictionary is a class-level variable and not a method-level variable, so I can not use var. When you put a class-level variable into new BindingSource(...) with null as the second argument I get an ArgumentNull exception. How do I bind a class-level dictionary as a data source for a list box? I don't like the List< KeyValuePair< string, string work-around becuase Where(...) and First(...) are ugly, complicated, and confusing compared to TryGetValue(...) and other Dictionary functionality.

    Read the article

  • C# XDocument Attribute Performance Concerns

    - by Dested
    I have a loaded XDocument that I need to grab all the attributes that equal a certain value and is of a certain element efficiently. My current IEnumerable<XElement> vm; if (!cacher2.TryGetValue(name,out vm)) { vm = project.Descendants(XName.Get(name)); cacher2.Add(name, vm); } XElement[] abdl = (vm.Where(a => a.Attribute(attribute).Value == ab)).ToArray(); cacher2 is a Dictionary<string,IEnumerable<XElement>> The ToArray is so I can evaluate the expression now. I dont think this causes any real speed concerns. The problem is the Where itself. I am searching through anywhere from 1 to 10k items. Any help?

    Read the article

  • Dictionary returning a default value if the key does not exist

    - by wasatz
    I find myself using the current pattern quite often in my code nowadays var dictionary = new Dictionary<type, IList<othertype>>(); // Add stuff to dictionary var somethingElse = dictionary.ContainsKey(key) ? dictionary[key] : new List<othertype>(); // Do work with the somethingelse variable Or sometimes var dictionary = new Dictionary<type, IList<othertype>>(); // Add stuff to dictionary IList<othertype> somethingElse; if(!dictionary.TryGetValue(key, out somethingElse) { somethingElse = new List<othertype>(); } Both of these ways feel quite roundabout. What I really would like is something like dictionary.GetValueOrDefault(key) Now, I could write an extension method for the dictionary class that does this for me, but I figured that I might be missing something that already exists. SO, is there a way to do this in a way that is more "easy on the eyes" without writing an extension method to dictionary?

    Read the article

  • Looking for a syntactic shortcut for accessing dictionaries

    - by Sisiutl
    I have an abstract base class that holds a Dictionary. I'd like inherited classes to be able to access the dictionary fields using a convenient syntax. Currently I have lots of code like this: string temp; int val; if (this.Fields.TryGetValue("Key", out temp)) { if (int.TryParse(temp, out val)) { // do something with val... } } Obviously I can wrap this in utility functions but I'd like to have a cool, convenient syntax for accessing the dictionary fields where I can simply say something like: int result = @Key; Is there any way to do something like this in C# (3.5)?

    Read the article

  • In C#: How to declare a generic Dictionary with a type as key and an enumeration of that type as val

    - by Marcel
    Hi all, I want to declare a dictionary that stores typed IEnumerable's of a specific type, with that exact type as key, like so: (Edited to follow johny g's comment) private IDictionary<Type, IEnumerable<T>> _dataOfType where T: BaseClass; //does not compile! The concrete classes I want to store, all derive from BaseClass, therefore the idea to use it as constraint. The compiler complains that it expects a semicolon after the member name. If it would work, I would expect this would make the later retrieval from the dictionary simple like: IEnumerable<ConcreteData> concreteData; _sitesOfType.TryGetValue(typeof(ConcreteType), out concreteData); How to define such a dictionary?

    Read the article

1 2 3  | Next Page >